Re: A Republican!!!!!! (was Re: OT: sponge burning!)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Steve Lamb wrote:
> Joe Hart wrote:
>> Why? Because a) a bus comes every seven minutes b) I don't have to
>> deal with the traffic (which is bad at times).
>
> Every 7 minutes? So at 3:14am I can expect a bus by 3:21am?
Well, no. The buses don't start their daily schedule until 5 am, so at
that time you might have to wait up to an hour because during the night
(from 00:00 to 05:00) they one come once per hour.
>
>> Plus side, don't have to search for a parking space, minus side have to
>> lug the suitcases on the bus/train.
>
> For us it's simpler. We drive to the airport, part where we want (of
> which there is ample parking) and take the shuttle which drops us off at the
> terminal of our choice. Since the shuttles are designed to carry passengers
> and their luggage no problems with the luggage.
We have the same, but the traffic getting to the airport can be
horrendous because the highways are jammed with people during the day.
It is faster to drive to the airport during non-peak hours, but the peak
hours are increasing as more and more people use the highways.
>> Where I live, it is the _bicycle_ that is the preferred method of
>> transportation. Not so bad when the weather is nice, but I'm too
>> Americanized to use it for my grocery shopping (although there are a lot
>> of Dutch who do).
> Which seems foolish all around. To bike anywhere I would want to go would
> take the better part of an hour one way. Or, ohhhh, less than 10m by my
> motorcycle. So a short errand of 35m (10m drive, 5m park, 10m shopping, 10m
> back home) becomes an all-afternoon adventure on a bicycle. Nevermind that
> the carying capacity on my motorcycle is greater than that of a bicycle. Even
> buses would take longer to get to the store I am thinking of, at least 35m
> from my house to the store since it isn't door-to-door service that the
> motorcycle provides. Still the better part of the afternoon.
It all depends on where you live. You have to consider that The
Netherlands is the second most densely populated country in the world,
and being so, bicycles become one of the better modes of transportation.
A moped is even better because you don't have to pedal.
The whole country is laid out with bicycle paths, and in many cases the
route from point a to point b is much shorter using a bicycle than a
car. Not to mention the fact that in most cities there is not enough
parking and most city centers are pedestrian only, so even if you take
the car, you have to park it quite a distance from where you want to go,
but if you take a bicycle (or a moped) you can usually park it right in
front of the door (and hope nobody steals it).
> The only cases where public transportation wins is when the roads are so
> poorly designed/maintained that they're a complete impediment to the rapid
> flow of private vehicular traffic. That is not the case in virtually all of
> America, even Paul's dreaded Los Angeles. Down there I lived in Long Beach,
> worked in Pasadena and commuted to work every day. It took me just a hair
> over 45m by motorcycle in the "horrible" rush hour traffic. The one time I
> looked at public transportation it would've been over 2 hours for the same
> distance.
I agree. Poor road design can cause problems, as does overcrowding
(which is what we have here). Public Transportation is the only
solution. In many cities one does not even need a car (New York City is
one of them).
One of the rules that we have here is that motorcycles are allowed to
lane-split, and the cars usually make room for them. It's harder to get
a motorcycle license here, but if you get one, you don't have traffic
problems. You do however, still get wet when it rains (and it does that
frequently).
Joe
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFF5qVYiXBCVWpc5J4RApLUAJ9yTN4h/qafgRDwXfVgT49nhkyxFwCgj3H7
BdO6xOJeH6VivlplualYehQ=
=DdOK
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: