Living Car Free - Americans should sacrifice their SUVs

Edwards: Americans should sacrifice their SUVs (http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/08/29/edwards.kucinich.ap/index.html)

LAKE BUENA VISTA, Florida (AP) -- Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards told a labor group Tuesday that he would ask Americans to make a big sacrifice: their sport utility vehicles.

"I think Americans are actually willing to sacrifice," Edwards said during a forum held by the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers. "One of the things they should be asked to do is drive more fuel efficient vehicles."

The former North Carolina senator was asked specifically if he would tell them to give up their SUVS. He said, "Yes."

Longshot candidate Rep. Dennis Kucinich of Ohio also spoke to the group and said he had a machinists union flag hanging outside his congressional office and that he is a strong supporter of workers.

Edwards was clearly popular with the group, several times drawing standing ovations, including once when he said weapons and equipment used by America's military needs to be made in the United States. He said now tanks and ammunition for M16 rifles are being made in other countries.

"If your tax dollars are being used to produce the products that keep America safe, that provide defense for the American people, those jobs should remain in the United States of America," Edwards said.

He also said as president he would ask residents to conserve energy and said the nation needs to focus on being a leader in creating alternative energy. He said he wants a national cap on carbon dioxide emissions that is lowered each year.

"We are the worst polluter on the planet. We are 4 percent of the world's population, we're putting out 25 percent of the world's greenhouse gas," Edwards said. "America's going to have to change."

Edwards was asked during his appearance how he explained the contradiction of asking Americans to sacrifice while he's living in a 28,000-square-foot mansion.

He said he came from nothing, worked hard all his life, has always supported workers and fought big corporations as a lawyer.

"I have no apologies whatsoever for what I've done with my life," he said to loud cheers. "My entire life has been about the same cause, which is making sure wherever you come from, whatever your family is, whatever the color of your skin, you get a real chance to do something great in this country."

Kucinich was also well received at the convention, and played up his reputation for being against the Washington establishment.

The machinists conference was held at a Walt Disney World convention center, and he told the crowd, "I come from a place you can call Disney World on the Potomac."

That sounds nice, but he is the biggest hypocrite alive. Walk the walk or else don't talk the talk loser.

I wonder if Edwards will give up his SUV collection? I have no respect for his ilk. He made his money suing hospitals and insurance companies...now you know part of the reason your medical bills and insurance rates are so affordable:rolleyes:

Aaron:)

I wonder if Edwards will give up his SUV collection?Does he really have one?


I have no respect for his ilk. He made his money suing hospitals and insurance companies...now you know part of the reason your medical bills and insurance rates are so affordable:rolleyes:Negligent doctors, right? :lol:

I took a class from a P.I. attorney, and every class we would discuss the readings, and then discuss some of his cases. He had one case where a little girl broke her arm, the doctor set her arm wrong, and then ignored her cries of pain when the anesthetic wore off-- he just gave her more anesthetic. Well, because he had set her arm wrong, she was in pain because her blood supply to the arm was being cut off. By the time her family stopped listening to the doctor, it was too late to save her arm. She'll spend the rest of her life with the arm of a 4 year old.

Of course, it's REAL easy for a negligent practitioner's insurance company to blame the rising costs of insurance on the little girl's attorney. :rolleyes:

I think the issue of hypocrisy here deals more with the fact that Edwards owns a 28,000 square foot mansion. The amount of fuel required to run the air conditioning there probably equals about ten SUV's.

I think the issue of hypocrisy here deals more with the fact that Edwards owns a 28,000 square foot mansion. The amount of fuel required to run the air conditioning there probably equals about ten SUV's.Maybe.

But I'm not sure that voting for another candidate who ALSO lives in a 28,000 s.f. mansion and who DOESN'T intend to make a serious effort to address global warming will be the response the Earth needs right now...

lets not forget the BIGGEST hypocrite in the world, MR Al Gore himself, with his 4 mansions, all his cars and SUVS, and the fact he flies a fuel sucking plane everywhere, telling everyone to shape up and cut back without doing so himself.

Maybe.

But I'm not sure that voting for another candidate who ALSO lives in a 28,000 s.f. mansion and who DOESN'T intend to make a serious effort to address global warming will be the response the Earth needs right now...

Actually his ranch sports many eco-friendly features, and is of a modest size.

dis the message cause the messenger is a hypocrit?

rings shallow and selective in today's world does it not?

hypocrit or not, less SUV's and smaller cars is a small sacrifice and quite effective

Nobody here is suggesting that the message doesn't ring clear, what I suggest is that the person ringing the bell isn't qualified.

For the record he has two SUV's, a truck and a 28000 sf mansion. Oh, but he has carbon offsets...that makes it ok (sarcasm). That is hypocracy and I don't mind calling it out, even if his point has merit.

Nobody here is suggesting that the message doesn't ring clear, what I suggest is that the person ringing the bell isn't qualified.

For the record he has two SUV's, a truck and a 28000 sf mansion. Oh, but he has carbon offsets...that makes it ok (sarcasm). That is hypocracy and I don't mind calling it out, even if his point has merit.So we should all vote for somebody who WON'T lead on this issue, at least until somebody who is "qualified" comes along?

'cause I don't see anybody else taking a stand....

Should we also require any Presidential candidate to be a practicing vegan-- see the NY Times piece about global warming and the meat industry (http://bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=338400)-- before we allow them to raise the issue of global warming?

Nobody here is suggesting that the message doesn't ring clear, what I suggest is that the person ringing the bell isn't qualified.

For the record he has two SUV's, a truck and a 28000 sf mansion. Oh, but he has carbon offsets...that makes it ok (sarcasm). That is hypocracy and I don't mind calling it out, even if his point has merit.


how many senators or representatives are less than millionaires and live "small"?

thing is, his message is accurate regardless and I don't even like the guy

everyone is a hypocrit in some form or fashion, this kind is cheap and petty and quite common in DC

Bad issue framing: Americans should give up their SUVs.

Better: Let's make it easier for people to get by with less driving.

Does he really have one? Yes at least 3 Suburban and his wife drives an Escalade.


Does Negligent doctors, right? :lol:

I took a class from a P.I. attorney, and every class we would discuss the readings, and then discuss some of his cases. He had one case where a little girl broke her arm, the doctor set her arm wrong, and then ignored her cries of pain when the anesthetic wore off-- he just gave her more anesthetic. Well, because he had set her arm wrong, she was in pain because her blood supply to the arm was being cut off. By the time her family stopped listening to the doctor, it was too late to save her arm. She'll spend the rest of her life with the arm of a 4 year old.

Of course, it's REAL easy for a negligent practitioner's insurance company to blame the rising costs of insurance on the little girl's attorney. :rolleyes:

I have absolutely no problem with suing someone for gross negligence or malpractice. But in too many cases the big winner is the lawyer, not the victim(s).

Aaron:)

Yes at least 3 Suburban and his wife drives an Escalade.

That sounds more like a motorcade to me (speaking as someone who's seen his fair share).

I have no opinions about the guy, though. We're still a LONG ways from the elections.

Edwards was asked during his appearance how he explained the contradiction of asking Americans to sacrifice while he's living in a 28,000-square-foot mansion.

He said he came from nothing, worked hard all his life, has always supported workers and fought big corporations as a lawyer.

"I have no apologies whatsoever for what I've done with my life," he said to loud cheers. "My entire life has been about the same cause, which is making sure wherever you come from, whatever your family is, whatever the color of your skin, you get a real chance to do something great in this country."

What the hell? That is the biggest contradiction I've ever heard in my life. "I think we need to sacrifice, but... I worked really really hard, so it's okay.".

Couldn't someone say the same for their SUV?

What a moron. The same goes for the fools cheering him on. This is just more lip service. This fool thinks he's going to lead us into a lower-energy future? This is just one more example of the great delusion and ridiculous sense of entitlement that exists everywhere in this country. Of the small majority that says they want to help, almost nobody wants to make any real sacrifices. Switch to CFLs and buy a hybrid!!!11 Earth to John: the realities of the future are going to require us to change.

He won't be getting my vote, suffice to say.

I think the problemis, he wants to tell you what to do, but he's too good/important/busy to do it himself.If he feels this way about this issue, he surely feels the same about others.

I will have to say Edwards rubs me the wrong way. The way he tilts his head when talking, his wavy hair, his tone of voice, I wouldn't trust that guy no matter what he said.

Yes at least 3 Suburban and his wife drives an Escalade.



I have absolutely no problem with suing someone for gross negligence or malpractice. But in too many cases the big winner is the lawyer, not the victim(s).

Aaron:)


ever worked in a law firm?

this subject with Edwards is hilarious, why? Cause well, we have one of the biggest hypocrits ever in history working in the whitehouse right this very minute yet when that hypocracy is brought up people just act like it never happened, then something petty like this occurs and suddenly Edwards is wrong, his message is wrong, its just all wrong.

this same thread is on P&R at the moment too

govt officials lie

govt officials are hypocrits

everyone is a hypocrit at some point or another

this is nothing new

would less SUV's in the US be a good thing? I think it would, gonna happen one way or the other whether some like it or not

When I read the title I imagined an Aztec like ceremony where you drive it to the top of a hill, rip its heart out and tumble it down to the recycling center at the base of the hill. Or maybe a sledge hammer party...

When I read the title I imagined an Aztec like ceremony where you drive it to the top of a hill, rip its heart out and tumble it down to the recycling center at the base of the hill. Or maybe a sledge hammer party...

Lol - when can I join in :)

The phrase "lead by example" comes to mind. As in, Edwards does not. I would vote for someone who does. I guess that eliminates all the candidates. Bummer.

http://www.carbontax.org/

i read or heard somewhere that if American SUVs got the same average mileage as cars we would not need any foreign oil. not sure if it's true or not, but if it is...

The phrase "lead by example" comes to mind. As in, Edwards does not. I would vote for someone who does. I guess that eliminates all the candidates. Bummer.


nothing new there either, very very few in Congress or govt period "lead by example"

The phrase "lead by example" comes to mind. As in, Edwards does not. I would vote for someone who does. I guess that eliminates all the candidates.Exactly. The next question is, do you vote at all, or do you not vote? And if you do vote, which candidates are promising leadership on the issue, and which candidates are promising "business as usual"?

By the way, it turns out that Edwards' SUV is a Ford Escape hybrid-- perhaps not carbon-free, but not a gas guzzler either.

Lead by example?

And what do the other candidates drive?

I have absolutely no problem with suing someone for gross negligence or malpractice.Gross negligence means the person knew that their action would likely injure somebody, but they did it anyway. Think of the guy who drives through a school zone at 100 MPH when children are present.

Malpractice is professional negligence-- it means professionals (including lawyers) are held to a higher standard in the performance of their jobs.

Simple negligence is your standard, garden-variety negligence. Think of the guy who right-hooks you at a stoplight.

In every case, you've been injured, and in every case, the law says you're entitled to compensation for your injuries. If there were no compensation for simple negligence, that guy who right hooks you at the stoplight could just say "sorry"-- if he felt like saying "sorry"-- and that would be the end of it, even though you have medical bills, lost wages, pain and suffering, etc.


But in too many cases the big winner is the lawyer, not the victim(s).There are limits to what an attorney can charge, and an attorney who goes above those limits risks being disciplined-- even disbarred-- by the State Bar. The average fee for contingency-fee lawyers is about 30% of the award.

Now let's look at what the client gets for that 30%. If you are wealthy, you can always choose to pay an attorney by the hour. The hourly rate will vary, depending on the attorney, the prevailing rate in that community, and the intricacies of the case. Where I live, $250/hour is a fair rate for an experienced attorney. Rates can go higher, depending on the attorney's reputation and skills.

But let's say you aren't wealthy, and you can't afford to pay an attorney $250/hour to work on your case over the next 3-4 years. If somebody negligently injures you, should you just have to suck it up, because the insurance company can afford to pay a full staff of attorneys to fight you, and you can't afford even one attorney?

That's where contingency-fee attorneys come in. They take your case, with the expectation that they will be paid if you win, and they will be paid nothing if you lose. You, the person too poor to hire an attorney to represent you, now have an attorney. And that attorney will work on your case for the next 3-4 years, without any guarantee of getting paid.

Think about that for a moment. Would you go to work over the next 3-4 years, without really knowing if you'll be paid at the end of the job? That's what contingency-fee attorneys do every day. Would you front money out of your own pocket to your client's job, without knowing if you'll be paid? That's what contingency-fee attorneys do on every case. Let's say you're injured by a negligent motorist, and the insurance company is putting up a fight. You hire a contingency-fee attorney to represent you. Your attorney then hires experts to help your case. He hires a forensic engineer to recreate the accident. That engineer gets paid before the case ever goes to trial, regardless of whether you win or lose. That engineer gets paid out of your attorney's pocket-- not yours. If you lose your case, your attorney is out the engineering fees. If you win, your attorney gets reimbursed. Do you need an expert medical witness to testify about your injuries? Guess who pays for that. Does your attorney need to consult with other attorneys? Every attorney brought into the case gets a cut of that 30% contingency fee-- if you win.

At the end of your case, if you have a good case and a good attorney and a good jury, you will win damages for the injuries that negligent motorist caused you. On the other hand, you may get less than you hoped for, or nothing at all, if you lose. And if you lose, your attorney doesn't get paid.

Sometimes, contingency-fee attorneys win. Sometimes, they lose. When they lose, they have to keep afloat on the fees from their last win. And when they win, their fees have to go towards experts on the next case, and keep an office running, and a roof over their heads, and food on the table, long enough to win the next case-- if they win the next case.

being an attorney means gambling bigtime

you spend massive amounts of cash upfront on the hope that your case and skills are strong enough to win a settelment or award which will give the client and yourself a good return.........isn't too uncommon to pursue a case for years and spend thousands and end up losing, it does happen

medical doctors as expert witnesses here locally get $2000 per hour of court time

depositions are $4 per page roughly plus costs to get the witness there for the deposition

paralegals vary, locally they run anywhere from 16-20 per hour to 65 per hour

just food for thought, some of these attorneys with auto accidents for example might get 30% of a settlement which only nets them a couple of grand, I see that almost every week..........I work for several of them

the winners are the insurance companies, they win no matter what, even when they have to pay for a settlement, they still win, their $$ they use for payouts is insured and leveraged to begin with.........insurance companies have their own insurance, and they play to win.........many won't even touch some states like mississippi or louisiana any longer for things like flood or catastrophic loss insurance on property

Exactly. The next question is, do you vote at all, or do you not vote? And if you do vote, which candidates are promising leadership on the issue, and which candidates are promising "business as usual"?



You know, i really wish we could vote for no one. There should be a box that you can check if none of the candidates are sufficient to you. If "no one" gets a certain percentage (say 35%) then the election should be redone. It is stupid that if i do not agree with any of the candidates my option is to just stay at home and not vote at all. I wish i could vote for no one.....

I think the problemis, he wants to tell you what to do, but he's too good/important/busy to do it himself....

BINGO!!

Edwards has shown himself to be a true Liberal. He's hungry for the power to tell everyone else how to live, as long as it doesn't effect him.

Doesn't the mileage a vehicle gets and the pollution it puts out depend on the size (and modernity) if its engine, not on whether it's an SUV? Surely an SUV with a 4 cylinder engine (or even a small V6) is far better for the environment than a car with a V8.

"I think Americans are actually willing to sacrifice,"

I think you are wrong Mr Edwards

The truth is, none of the candidates are addressing the issue of climate change with the balls that will be needed to beat it, even though it's the most dangerous crisis we've faced since missile standoffs with the Soviet Union.

But is it fair to blame the politicians? They are after votes, which means they're going to pander to you and me. Most Americans clearly don't want to make any changes in their lives, so why should our democratic leaders be any better than we are?

Look in the mirror before you start blaming anybody else.

I think you are wrong Mr EdwardsI think it all depends on how "sacrifice" is presented. If Americans are presented with a call to "freeze in the dark," they will reject it, as they clearly did when Jimmy Carter's energy conservation policies were negatively painted in that light by the political opposition. On the other hand, Americans clearly accepted personal sacrifice during World War II, with rationing, victory gardens, and so forth.

If a policy of energy efficiency is presented to Americans as a "patriotic duty," Americans will respond to that, especially if it doesn't have a "freeze in the dark" connotation.

It all depends on how the issue is framed.

BINGO!!

Edwards has shown himself to be a true Liberal. He's hungry for the power to tell everyone else how to live, as long as it doesn't effect him.

that is the case with almost every politician from the President right on down the line

human nature

BINGO!!

Edwards has shown himself to be a true Liberal. He's hungry for the power to tell everyone else how to live, as long as it doesn't effect him.

And conservatives are eager to tell people that they shouldn't be gay or have abortions, even though they're not affected by those issues.

The truth is, none of the candidates are addressing the issue of climate change with the balls that will be needed to beat it, even though it's the most dangerous crisis we've faced since missile standoffs with the Soviet Union.

.

This is a silly statement.So are you telling me that at any time, we could be 35 minutes from total worldwide devestation?
Of course not.
The hottest year on record was 1934. How much do our SUVs affect the weather in 1934?

have abortions, even though they're not affected by those issues.

Murdering babies affects all people.

BINGO!!

Edwards has shown himself to be a true Liberal. He's hungry for the power to tell everyone else how to live, as long as it doesn't effect him.

And conservatives are different? Terry Shiavo, gay marriage, Elian Gonzales, and Ann Coulter's suggestion to forcibly convert Muslims to Christianity come immediately to mind, but I'm sure there are plenty of other examples. Essentially, the difference between conservatives and liberals is this: Liberals want to control people's economic behavior. Conservatives want to control people's personal behavior. I'd prefer to tell both sides to go to hell, but, since we live on a finite planet with limited resources, I'll accept the liberal option, since it appears to be far less odious. Supporting a company's right to lay waste to the environment and exploit workers, while telling gays that they can't get married, seems a bit unreasonable to me.

This is a silly statement.So are you telling me that at any time, we could be 35 minutes from total worldwide devestation?
Of course not.
The hottest year on record was 1934. How much do our SUVs affect the weather in 1934?

well, this is simply not true. 2005 tied with 1998 as the hottest year on record.


The record heat of 2005 is part of a longer-term warming trend exacerbated by the rise of heat-trapping gases in our atmosphere that is due primarily to our burning fossil fuels and clearing forests. Nineteen of the hottest 20 years on record have occurred since 1980.

Link (http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science/recordtemp2005.html)

Murdering babies affects all people.

not really, but the alternative is the US would now have about 50 million more residents and many more people on welfare or subsidized healthcare based on statistics anyway

"Doesn't the mileage a vehicle gets and the pollution it puts out depend on the size (and modernity) if its engine, not on whether it's an SUV? Surely an SUV with a 4 cylinder engine (or even a small V6) is far better for the environment than a car with a V8."

I drive a big fat gas guzzling Dodge V8 4x4 pickup when I drive to work, however I have commuted about 1000 miles this summer alone. Does that make me a hypocrite. BTW, I live in a rural and work blue collar, where a truck is more feasible than in say downtown Philadelphia.

I drive a big fat gas guzzling Dodge V8 4x4 pickup when I drive to work, however I have commuted about 1000 miles this summer alone. Does that make me a hypocrite.I would say that combined with this does:


That sounds nice, but he is the biggest hypocrite alive. Walk the walk or else don't talk the talk loser.

Lets not pick on all SUV's some burn less fuel than mini-vans and large cars. Some people actually need them because they live in hellish winter weather area's. Most don't however need them.

Bad issue framing: Americans should give up their SUVs.

Better: Let's make it easier for people to get by with less driving.

ex-freakin-zactly

I couldn't agree more, and I'm so sick of hearing the "let's all switch to more fuel-efficient cars' mantra being mindlessly repeated. Even in planning meetings I attend, I hear the same crap being repeated. Is it good for people to drive more fuel efficient vehicles? Yes. Is it good to perpetuate automobile culture further and increase per capita vehicle miles traveled (VMT's) to the point that our fuel savings are erased by increased VMT's caused by ever more suburban development miles and miles away from employment centers and older downtowns? Nope, that, my friend, is complete and utter lunacy. I swear to god, I will quit my job and devote my life to campaigning for any candidate who actually has the brains to mention more dense, compact development patterns that support transit and walking as an alternative to SUV's and cars, period. Knowing that not one of these enviro-chickenhawks will utter anything like that any time soon, I'm not too worried about having to brush up on my campaigning skills.

My community is working on updating its community plan. Densification is the buzz word of the day now, and it's a concept I support. But people still want single family homes with yards, especially if they have children still living at home. Building such neighbourhoods will spread out a community somewhat. We also have people who want small acreages for various lifestyle reasons. Home buying pattens won't change until people can see advantages to living in more compact neighbourhoods. The advantages are there, but so far it seems as if they haven't been marketed all that well.

Lets not pick on all SUV's some burn less fuel than mini-vans and large cars. Some people actually need them because they live in hellish winter weather area's. Most don't however need them.
I never needed a monster 4x4 for winter weather. My best two winter vehicles were a 1968 Renault R10, rear engine rear drive and my 1978 Honda Civic 1200, front engine front drive. I ran aggressive snow radials on the drive axles and never had a problem. In fact I passed many an overly confident SUV/4x4 driver sitting in the ditch after they had blown by me moments earlier.:p (at the time I was living in the upper midwest) Trucks are a tool, I own a couple. My work truck happens to be a crew cab F350. What is stupid is that I only really need once every couple of weeks, but have to drive it because I never know exactly which week or day it is going to be required:( I would much prefer to be riding my bike...but that is coming soon:D

Aaron:)

how many senators or representatives are less than millionaires and live "small"?

thing is, his message is accurate regardless and I don't even like the guy

everyone is a hypocrit in some form or fashion, this kind is cheap and petty and quite common in DC

Is Ed Begley Jr a hypocrite?

My community is working on updating its community plan. Densification is the buzz word of the day now, and it's a concept I support. But people still want single family homes with yards, especially if they have children still living at home. Building such neighbourhoods will spread out a community somewhat. We also have people who want small acreages for various lifestyle reasons. Home buying pattens won't change until people can see advantages to living in more compact neighbourhoods. The advantages are there, but so far it seems as if they haven't been marketed all that well.

Densification...all they need to do is look at the neighborhoods that were built back in the 1920's, and prior. We have some of those left around here. What was neat about most of the ones I lived in was the fact they were built around a small neighbourhood park. Unfortunately over the years the parks became unmaintained and fell prey to the usual issues of various thugs taking over. In many cases the city sold the park to a developer to put more crap housing. Some neighbourhoods hit bottom and have recovered and are now nice places to live...again, others have been bulldozed and had low income housing projects built, and yet others have been covered over by strip malls. Humans can very shortsighted and selfish.

Another thing that I feel has led to the demise of the neighborhood is our demand for the cheapest price/greatest selection possible. It drove the neighborhood grocer, butcher, hardware store, pharmacy and many other small businesses out of the neighborhoods and out of business, forcing us to drive to edges of town where the latest and greatest strip mall could be found, now those have closed and new ones built even further out. I was at my closest chain grocery store last night...do we really need 65 different types of barbecue sauce to choose from? (yes I counted) The old neighbourhood store probably stocked 500>1000 items the average grocery store today? Over 28,000!:eek: We still have a couple of independent markets in my area (not within cycling range unfortunately) that I still frequent, no they aren't as cheap as the big chains and the selection isn't as great, but the owners live in my town and the money spent there is spent here not sent off to shareholders around the world. They are not prone to downsizing and laying off people just to keep the stock profits up.

Aaron:)

Have you guys read the book "Geography of Nowhere" by James Howard Kunstler? It deals directly with the same issues of densification, local economies, etc.. I just finished reading my copy and plan to donate it to my local library, but if any of you would like to read it, and can't find it in your area, I would be happy to mail off my copy to you, provided you send me the few dollars required to ship and that you donate it yourself when you're done.

Excellent book; about halfway through I become totally engrossed and ended up reading the rest that same day. Of course, that was the same day I injured myself on my bike, so I was also taking it easy for that reason. ;)

Have you guys read the book "Geography of Nowhere" by James Howard Kunstler? It deals directly with the same issues of densification, local economies, etc.. I just finished reading my copy and plan to donate it to my local library, but if any of you would like to read it, and can't find it in your area, I would be happy to mail off my copy to you, provided you send me the few dollars required to ship and that you donate it yourself when you're done.

Excellent book; about halfway through I become totally engrossed and ended up reading the rest that same day. Of course, that was the same day I injured myself on my bike, so I was also taking it easy for that reason. ;)

I'm very familiar with Jim's work, and while I wouldn't consider him a "friend" per se, I have met him on several occasions and converse regularly with him over email. He's definitely more on track with the follow-up to "geography", which is entitled "Home from Nowhere". I recommend "Home" quite often to those interested in the subject of the tragedy of urban development over the last 50 years. His books (and SimCity :D ) were actually what led me to be an urban planner in the first place. I often feel much like Jim in that I'm fighting the fight with precious little support in the face of a development community and planning profession that still think density is bad and that we will continue happily motoring into the future, regardless of what reality says. I have a lot of respect for that man.