Advocacy & Safety - "I don't believe a bicycle is a transportation device," ...

I think the supervisor is going to get some angry reaction to his statement:

Fairfax supervisors clash over bike plans
By: Brian Hughes
Examiner Staff Writer
February 21, 2010


Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/local/Fairfax-supervisors-clash-over-bike-plans-84814842.html#ixzz0gBOgoXkY

Transportation or recreation? A debate about the purpose of bicycles will shape how Fairfax County residents reach new Metro stations in coming years.
"I don't believe a bicycle is a transportation device," Supervisor John Cook, R-Braddock District, said during a transportation committee meeting. "I think it's a recreation device. The big problem is people don't want to ride their bike in the rain or get sweaty before work."
Transportation officials have identified $12.7 million in pedestrian and bicycle projects for the Reston area -- intended to improve accessibility to the planned Wiehle Avenue and Reston Parkway Metro stations, part of the transit extension to Washington Dulles International Airport.
Cook categorized bike trails as little more than a weekend diversion, vexing fellow supervisors who have pushed for more bike access.
"I don't agree with him," said Supervisor John Foust, D-Dranesville. "People don't do it now -- not because they don't want to -- but because they can't. It's not safe."
In 2007-2008, 4.5 percent of Fairfax residents older than 16 used a bike on a weekday, about half of whomused off-road bike trails or sidewalks, according to a study commissioned by the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments.
The Reston plan calls for new trails, more bike crossings and extensions to paths to enhance the bicycle grid in the county...


Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/local/Fairfax-supervisors-clash-over-bike-plans-84814842.html#ixzz0gBOr0ARk

This supervisor is typical of the mindset that is forcing people to stay in their cars. Hopefully there will be enough outrage directed at him he will be forced to resign.

"I don't believe a bicycle is a transportation device," Supervisor John Cook, R-Braddock District, said during a transportation committee meeting.

I prove people like this wrong every time I ride a bike to a destination for a purpose. Which, come to think of it, is every time I ride a bike.:lol:

For most Americans, the guy is right.

I'd be interested to know if DC traffic laws define bikes as vehicles; several times, I've checked other states around the country, and some have an actual definition of a bike as a vehicle. If indeed DC does do so, then this fool will have to eat his words, because a vehicle is a transportation device.

I wasn't able to find it for DC; anyone else have better luck?

I prove people like this wrong every time I ride a bike to a destination for a purpose. Which, come to think of it, is every time I ride a bike.:lol:

If cycling is not transportation, the recreational ride i'd take to work saved the world (according to my estimate) no less than 1000 gallons of gasoline.

At rush hour in the Washington, DC area, particularly in Fairfax County, a car is not a transportation device.

Paul

I'd be interested to know if DC traffic laws define bikes as vehicles; several times, I've checked other states around the country, and some have an actual definition of a bike as a vehicle. If indeed DC does do so, then this fool will have to eat his words, because a vehicle is a transportation device.

I wasn't able to find it for DC; anyone else have better luck?

It's Virginia, not DC.

Virginia Code § 46.2-100. Definitions.

"Bicycle" means a device propelled solely by human power, upon which a person may ride either on or astride a regular seat attached thereto, having two or more wheels in tandem, including children's bicycles, except a toy vehicle intended for use by young children. For purposes of Chapter 8 (§ 46.2-800 et seq.) of this title, a bicycle shall be a vehicle while operated on the highway.

"Highway" means the entire width between the boundary lines of every way or place open to the use of the public for purposes of vehicular travel in the Commonwealth, including the streets and alleys, and ......."

It's Virginia, not DC.

Virginia Code § 46.2-100. Definitions.

"Bicycle" means a device propelled solely by human power, upon which a person may ride either on or astride a regular seat attached thereto, having two or more wheels in tandem, including children's bicycles, except a toy vehicle intended for use by young children. For purposes of Chapter 8 (§ 46.2-800 et seq.) of this title, a bicycle shall be a vehicle while operated on the highway.

"Highway" means the entire width between the boundary lines of every way or place open to the use of the public for purposes of vehicular travel in the Commonwealth, including the streets and alleys, and ......."

Looks like Mr. Cook has a great big sh**burger waiting for him to eat, LOL.

"I don't believe a bicycle is a transportation device"

Two immediate thoughts:
1)My dictionary defines Transport as "to carry from one place to another" and my bicycle certainly does that. Perhaps in your own personal language you ascribe some other meaning to the word transport, in which case you have to translate it into English so the rest of us can know what the hell you're talking about.

2) Who cares what you believe? the bicycle it is defined as vehicle under law, and the law trumps your personal opinion every day of the week.

Clearly a bicycle is a vehicle for transportation. But I wonder about the bike paths the article mentioned. Will they be more suitable for transportation or recreation? I hope that transportation cyclists are involved in planning them to be useful for transportation.

This supervisor is typical of the mindset that is forcing people to stay in their cars. Hopefully there will be enough outrage directed at him he will be forced to resign.

That's rather laughable, considering that,


For most Americans, the guy is right.

I think the supervisor is going to get some angry reaction to his statement:

"I don't believe a bicycle is a transportation device," Supervisor John Cook, R-Braddock District, said during a transportation committee meeting. "I think it's a recreation device. The big problem is people don't want to ride their bike in the rain or get sweaty before work."

Well, as some others said, it's interesting that some people have the audacity needed to assume they can speak for every other human being riding a bike. A transportation device is defined as a device that can carry a person from point A to point B, and a bike fits the description. Some may also think water isn't wet, well, the belief itself does not make them right.

Typical of a transportation engineer. Several years ago, as a member of the Bicycling Committee of the local MPO, I was speaking to a group of Louisiana DOT engineers about designing roads for cycling. One of the older ones stood up & asked 'What are you going to do to get cyclists off MY roads?'

My companion, a consulting traffic engineer, prevented me from pinching the miscreant's head off.

I think the supervisor is going to get some angry reaction to his statement:

......"I don't believe a bicycle is a transportation device," Supervisor John Cook, R-Braddock District, said during a transportation committee meeting. "I think it's a recreation device. The big problem is people don't want to ride their bike in the rain or get sweaty before work."


By any reasonable measure...ton miles, passenger miles, revenue miles, value-added miles, bicycles are an infinitesimally small portion of the transportation matrix, and are likely to remain so well into the future. Even the tour de france, cyclings' premier event, is swarming with cars pursuing the teams carrying equipment and spare parts.

roughstuff

By any reasonable measure...ton miles, passenger miles, revenue miles, value-added miles, bicycles are an infinitesimally small portion of the transportation matrix, and are likely to remain so well into the future. Even the tour de france, cyclings' premier event, is swarming with cars pursuing the teams carrying equipment and spare parts.

roughstuff

Oh well by that logic we should also eliminate sidewalks... after all the "ton miles etc." of walking humans is so downright miserable.

The supervisor needs to go out and look at the infrastructure in their city, and see what it is geared for... if it is motor vehicles, (is there any doubt...) and consider that perhaps the reason so many motor vehicles are used... Then that supervisor needs to be shown this picture... and see if they can "get it."

http://bostonbiker.org/files/2010/01/car-bus-bike.jpg

I knew it was a big diff, but that's a neat picture. A good way to really bring it home to someone.

By any reasonable measure...ton miles, passenger miles, revenue miles, value-added miles, bicycles are an infinitesimally small portion of the transportation matrix, and are likely to remain so well into the future. Even the tour de france, cyclings' premier event, is swarming with cars pursuing the teams carrying equipment and spare parts.

roughstuff

Granted, but the fact still remains that a small percentage of our population does use bicycles for transportation, the trend of the last 5 years has that percentage growing and issues like the costs (both monetary and environmental) of fossil fuels will only ensure the trend continues upward.

Oh well by that logic we should also eliminate sidewalks... after all the "ton miles etc." of walking humans is so downright miserable.

.....Then that supervisor needs to be shown this picture... and see if they can "get it."

.....Well, some communities have done that, though I think sidewalks are for strolls and pedestrian enjoyment, not 'transportation,' so I think they are a good idea. In fact, thats why sidewalks were built...so that pedestrians (transporting little, or nothing) needn't walk in the roadway. And vice versa...transport vehicles don't use the sidewalk.

And as for the bus photo, what bull. Even if the bus was full (which they rarely are, beyond peak periods in densely populated cities), they eliminate the illustrated cars ONLY if their cars would have been

(1) ON that exact street
(2) AT that exact time.

roughstuff

Granted, but the fact still remains that a small percentage of our population does use bicycles for transportation, the trend of the last 5 years has that percentage growing and issues like the costs (both monetary and environmental) of fossil fuels will only ensure the trend continues upward.

Correct. And the issue becomes is that small (but growing) percentage in need of any changes (lanes, bike paths, etc) in our transportation infrastructure, or can they be accomodated without such accoutrements? Ask 5 Bikeforums users and you'll get ten different answers.

Nor do I bow the enviroGods of fossil fuel 'costs.' Considering recent discoveries in oil fields, massive discoveries of natural gas, and the nations coal reserves, we have more than enough fossil fuels to cover us during a transition to other sources of production over the next century.

roughstuff

The other angle is that motor vehicles on public roads are sometimes used for recreation alone and very often used for getting to recreation.

I wonder if they looked up the definition of Transportation?

The other angle is that motor vehicles on public roads are sometimes used for recreation alone and very often used for getting to recreation.
I know a bunch of laid-off workers that still rack up 1000-1500 miles a month, so there's a lot of truth in that.

.....Well, some communities have done that, though I think sidewalks are for strolls and pedestrian enjoyment, not 'transportation,' so I think they are a good idea.
This statement is just as ignorant as the statement about bikes in the OP.

Actually, far more people walk for transportation than ride bikes, both in the US and worldwide. Walking is the original mode of human transit, and it still has a lot to recommend it.

something like 1% of the population of the US thinks he's wrong. The number is higher in other countries.

1% is still a heck of a lot of people.

What he really means is "I don't think a bicycle is a viable transportation device given how crappy and dangerous we've engineered our cities to be to bicycles.

His comments probably have more to do with Fairfax County property taxes on motor vehicles than it does with bike paths.

Fairfax County tried to collect property taxes from me on a car registered in Hawaii while it was garaged in Hawaii. What they apparently did was took my name from my kids school registration, ran a national search for registered vehicles and then sent a bill to my Fairfax County address demanding I pay proerty tax on the car. I refused and dared them to arrest me, so that I could sue them. Funny, they never showed up at my door, they just had the county lawyer keep sending demands and threatening to put my name and picture in the local newspaper as a tax dodger.

And as for the bus photo, what bull. Even if the bus was full (which they rarely are, beyond peak periods in densely populated cities), they eliminate the illustrated cars ONLY if their cars would have been

(1) ON that exact street
(2) AT that exact time.

roughstuff
If all those people are on the bus and the alternative is use of the car then all those cars are in fact eliminated at the same time. Whether they are all on the same street is irrelevant as they would take up the same net space as in the picture. Spreading them out on several streets doesn't reduce their net footprint at all, so the comparison is perfectly valid.

If all those people are on the bus


Again, A very very big IF....




and the alternative is use of the car then all those cars are in fact eliminated at the same time. Whether they are all on the same street is irrelevant as they would take up the same net space as in the picture. Spreading them out on several streets doesn't reduce their net footprint at all, so the comparison is perfectly valid.

No they are not. If I have to take a bus at the top of the hour, while I can ride my car if and when I want, then I am not necessarily 'in my car' at the time I'd be 'on the bus.' Furthermore, if I am on side streets that are not jammed like this one, then their equivalent space doesn't contribute to delays. The bus halts repeatedly (disrupting traffic and lane spacing, including bike lanes, if there are any) at every bus stop. The bus completely destroys site lines with its bulk and profile, which the cars do not. (Trucks do also, of course). Finally, the car has much more mobility on the roadway than buses do. If I see this road is jammed I can take an alternate route. A bus does not have that choice.

Taking the bus to downtown from where I live takes nearly 45 minutes while the bus makes stops to apartment complexes, WalMart, an insane asylum, and numerous other stops, all in a fruitless attempt to troll for passengers. It is a 15 minute drive, 20 if ya hit the lights wrong. The remaining 30/25 minutes are time, gas, space, and money wasted.

roughstuff

Taking the bus to downtown from where I live takes nearly 45 minutes while the bus makes stops to apartment complexes, WalMart, an insane asylum, and numerous other stops, all in a fruitless attempt to troll for passengers. It is a 15 minute drive, 20 if ya hit the lights wrong. The remaining 30/25 minutes are time, gas, space, and money wasted.

roughstuff

So if 20 potential bus passengers choose instead to drive, you now have 20 cars x 20 minutes of time gas, space and money wasted. Even at it's worst the bus will not make the same pollution as 20 drivers in their own mostly empty cars. And I don't know this, but the buses in your area may even be low pollution vehicles... I wonder what those 20 drivers might be driving. And as slow and lumbering that a bus may be while it is "trolling" for passengers, it still does not use up the same amount of spaces as 20 drivers, in their mostly empty cars...

Again, A very very big IF....




No they are not. If I have to take a bus at the top of the hour, while I can ride my car if and when I want, then I am not necessarily 'in my car' at the time I'd be 'on the bus.' Furthermore, if I am on side streets that are not jammed like this one, then their equivalent space doesn't contribute to delays. The bus halts repeatedly (disrupting traffic and lane spacing, including bike lanes, if there are any) at every bus stop. The bus completely destroys site lines with its bulk and profile, which the cars do not. (Trucks do also, of course). Finally, the car has much more mobility on the roadway than buses do. If I see this road is jammed I can take an alternate route. A bus does not have that choice.

Taking the bus to downtown from where I live takes nearly 45 minutes while the bus makes stops to apartment complexes, WalMart, an insane asylum, and numerous other stops, all in a fruitless attempt to troll for passengers. It is a 15 minute drive, 20 if ya hit the lights wrong. The remaining 30/25 minutes are time, gas, space, and money wasted.

roughstuff
A lot of people drank the koolade provided by the auto and oil companies--you guzzled it. It's amazing that you can't see what a patsy you are.

And giving as evidence one bus on one route is just silly. So I'll give my own anecdotal evidence: My local bus company does 11 million trips a year in a catchment population of only 0.25 million. About 95 % of trips are on time--which is probably better than most people do in their cars. And the buses are always more than half full--and often have standees as they get close to the transit center. Also, I'm glad that the bus goes by the "insane asylum" since that's where I work.

Oh well by that logic we should also eliminate sidewalks... after all the "ton miles etc." of walking humans is so downright miserable.

The supervisor needs to go out and look at the infrastructure in their city, and see what it is geared for... if it is motor vehicles, (is there any doubt...) and consider that perhaps the reason so many motor vehicles are used... Then that supervisor needs to be shown this picture... and see if they can "get it."

http://bostonbiker.org/files/2010/01/car-bus-bike.jpg
Genec.. The bus/bike /car bit is pretty cool....Got a link..? Thanks...

Genec.. The bus/bike /car bit is pretty cool....Got a link..? Thanks...

Not really... I know the image is out there and I just search for car vrs bus vrs bike... using google images.

Some other equally interesting images also pop up... such as the image below, showing 42 folding bikes all crammed into the parking space for one SUV. This has long prompted my rant that there is plenty of room for bike parking, if shopping centers would just dedicate one or two auto parking spaces (in different locations) to bike parking.

http://www.treehugger.com/bromptons-parked.jpg

There is also this rather neat comparison link which refutes much of Roughstuff's arguments about buses...
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2009/02/how-many-people-need-to-ride-the-bus.php


What it basically means is that to “break even” with the impacts of driving alone in your car, a bus need only carry between 3 and 8 people!

...There is also this rather neat comparison link which refutes much of Roughstuff's arguments about buses...
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2009/02/how-many-people-need-to-ride-the-bus.php
Interesting--the bus only needs to carry 3 to 8 people to beat the efficiency of cars. And they were actually comparing buses to diesel cars with 1.4L to 2.0L engines that are much smaller than most American cars.

My bus company uses only the ultra-low sulfur engines, which reduce pollution. All of the new buses are diesel-electric hybrids. I don't know about fuel consumption, but these new buses accelerate as quickly as most cars--answering Roughstuff's objection that buses obstruct traffic because they are sluggish.

BTW, does his charge that "buses obstruct traffic" remind you of anything?

Not really... I know the image is out there and I just search for car vrs bus vrs bike... using google images.

Some other equally interesting images also pop up...

http://www.treehugger.com/bromptons-parked.jpg

Must be some special kind of Chinese Fire Drill required for anyone get their bike if it isn't on the exterior of that "parking" spot.

A lot of people drank the koolade provided by the auto and oil companies--you guzzled it. It's amazing that you can't see what a patsy you are.

Hmmmm. Does that make an electric bus an electric kool-aid test? I didn't know Tom Wolfe was a mass transit engineer! :)


And giving as evidence one bus on one route is just silly. ....

Well, the photograph that got this all started shows ONE BUS, on ONE ROUTE, and everyone seems perfectly happy with that 'evidence.' And I think my example...that taking the bus wastes 20 to 25 minutes of my time in fruitless stops and circuitous routes...is fairly typical of riders. At $10 an hour and 270 working days, thats almost $1100 in wasted time. For highly paid yuppie lawyers and city slickers, the cost is probably even higher.

roughstuff

Not really... I know the image is out there and I just search for car vrs bus vrs bike... using google images.



There is also this rather neat comparison link which refutes much of Roughstuff's arguments about buses...
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2009/02/how-many-people-need-to-ride-the-bus.php
Genec. I plugged in the properties data from your photo. So far no luck. I 'll keep trying. thanks..

I wonder if they looked up the definition of Transportation?

What you actually expect elected officials to use common sense?

His comments probably have more to do with Fairfax County property taxes on motor vehicles than it does with bike paths.

Fairfax County tried to collect property taxes from me on a car registered in Hawaii while it was garaged in Hawaii. What they apparently did was took my name from my kids school registration, ran a national search for registered vehicles and then sent a bill to my Fairfax County address demanding I pay property tax on the car. I refused and dared them to arrest me, so that I could sue them. Funny, they never showed up at my door, they just had the county lawyer keep sending demands and threatening to put my name and picture in the local newspaper as a tax dodger.

How did they figure that you owed property tax on a car that was registered and stored in another state? If they had carried out thir "threat" would you have been able to sue them?

Must be some special kind of Chinese Fire Drill required for anyone get their bike if it isn't on the exterior of that "parking" spot.

Oh sure it is just an illustration to show a point. The reality is that about 12 bikes fit into the spot of one typical auto parking space.

Genec. I plugged in the properties data from your photo. So far no luck. I 'll keep trying. thanks..

try this url: http://bostonbiker.org/

I strongly disagree with what the supervisor said:


"I don't agree with him," said Supervisor John Foust, D-Dranesville. "People don't do it now -- not because they don't want to -- but because they can't. It's not safe."

Properly operated, a bicycle is a safe means of transportation in a traffic lane. Oh, and the other supervisor was wrong too. ;)


This has long prompted my rant that there is plenty of room for bike parking, if shopping centers would just dedicate one or two auto parking spaces (in different locations) to bike parking.

There is plenty of bicycle parking in the stores near my home. At the grocery store I've never seen a bicycle at the rack besides my own; at Wal-Mart I occasionally see one other bicycle at the rack. I don't think lack of bicycle parking is the issue.

Hmmmm. Does that make an electric bus an electric kool-aid test? I didn't know Tom Wolfe was a mass transit engineer! :)



Well, the photograph that got this all started shows ONE BUS, on ONE ROUTE, and everyone seems perfectly happy with that 'evidence.' And I think my example...that taking the bus wastes 20 to 25 minutes of my time in fruitless stops and circuitous routes...is fairly typical of riders. At $10 an hour and 270 working days, thats almost $1100 in wasted time. For highly paid yuppie lawyers and city slickers, the cost is probably even higher.

roughstuff
So you actually work more hours because you drive? Most people would probably work the same hours either way.

Hmmmm. Does that make an electric bus an electric kool-aid test? I didn't know Tom Wolfe was a mass transit engineer! :)



Well, the photograph that got this all started shows ONE BUS, on ONE ROUTE, and everyone seems perfectly happy with that 'evidence.' And I think my example...that taking the bus wastes 20 to 25 minutes of my time in fruitless stops and circuitous routes...is fairly typical of riders. At $10 an hour and 270 working days, thats almost $1100 in wasted time. For highly paid yuppie lawyers and city slickers, the cost is probably even higher.

roughstuff

If you get enough people riding buses regularly, the bus lines can be made more efficient.

Those "highly paid yuppie lawyers" can use bus time to make those "billable" phone calls. In my area, there are experiments going on right now with wifi buses... so rather than waste time actually driving a car (you don't consider your time behind the wheel a waste?), you can use the transit time in the bus to be on line and actually working.

Looking at it that way, and by your calculations, rather than wasting 20 minutes driving, you will have 45 minutes of productive time.

There is plenty of bicycle parking in the stores near my home. At the grocery store I've never seen a bicycle at the rack besides my own; at Wal-Mart I occasionally see one other bicycle at the rack. I don't think lack of bicycle parking is the issue.

It is not THE issue, but it certainly is one issue that has to be overcome and it is easy to do... if the vision to do so is there.

At my local grocery, they finally put in a bike rack... holds 4 bikes, but they installed it against a wall, so 2 of the spaces are useless... there are always more bikes locked to benches and signs... well beyond the 2 that will fit in the rack. Lots of empty auto parking spaces too... all they had to do was put a bike rack in an empty auto parking space.

Of course the real irony is the local Home Depot has a rack for 6 bikes... and the local "green" and "healthy" grocery has no bike racks what so ever.

So you actually work more hours because you drive? Most people would probably work the same hours either way.


Yeeeechhhhhhh Roody. I don't work at all. I am just placing a reasonable value on a persons time. Its always been a question among economists what this number should be. Should it be their wage rate? Well...they are not working. But it clearly is not zero, either. There have been some clever studies done to try and 'infer' the value of one's leisure time, but even there the answers vary widely.

roughstuff

There is plenty of bicycle parking in the stores near my home. At the grocery store I've never seen a bicycle at the rack besides my own; at Wal-Mart I occasionally see one other bicycle at the rack. I don't think lack of bicycle parking is the issue.
I guess that depends on where you live, doesn't it? In some areas it definitely is an issue.

Yeeeechhhhhhh Roody. I don't work at all. I am just placing a reasonable value on a persons time. Its always been a question among economists what this number should be. Should it be their wage rate? Well...they are not working. But it clearly is not zero, either. There have been some clever studies done to try and 'infer' the value of one's leisure time, but even there the answers vary widely.

roughstuff
You're talking about opportunity costs, which in most individual's cases are pretty meaningless. But there are many values that come into play when people make transportation choices. It isn't easy to defend the choice of a car when good alternatives exist, so I admire your willingness to try.

If you get enough people riding buses regularly, the bus lines can be made more efficient.

Those "highly paid yuppie lawyers" can use bus time to make those "billable" phone calls. In my area, there are experiments going on right now with wifi buses... so rather than waste time actually driving a car (you don't consider your time behind the wheel a waste?), you can use the transit time in the bus to be on line and actually working.

Looking at it that way, and by your calculations, rather than wasting 20 minutes driving, you will have 45 minutes of productive time.

There is definitely a chicken and egg aspect to mass transit. Most of their costs are largely fixed, so the more you spread them over a larger number of users, the cheaper it gets. This is why I support 'subsidies' for mass transit, even going so far as making it completely 'free' (fareless) to encourage people to take it.

Now the wireless thing does make sense. My suspicion however is this is more likely to be true for rail/light rail, than buses? The former has tables and designated seats; the latter do not. Don't most lawyers on the LIRR file their briefs while riding into NYC?

Cell phone use can certainly be done, though I am sure the noise of twenty lawyers discussing lawsuits would be rather annoying chatter. :)

roughstuff

You're talking about opportunity costs, which in most individual's cases are pretty meaningless. But there are many values that come into play when people make transportation choices. It isn't easy to defend the choice of a car when good alternatives exist, so I admire your willingness to try.

They are not meaningless, they are just hard to measure. But sometimes opportunity costs can be far greater than the stated cost of an activity, and seriously distort decisionmaking if they are ignored. It sometimes takes poor people (babysitters, cleaning personnel, etc) almost two hours to get to their jobs (and 2 hours back) because mass transit cannot function efficiently unless on a hub and spoke system. In such cases it would be better to provide cash subsidies for cab fares, especially if such cabs were not artificially expensive due to medallion monolpolies; or if the vouchers could be use for car pooling with folks already headed in the direction you want to go.

roughstuff

There is definitely a chicken and egg aspect to mass transit. Most of their costs are largely fixed, so the more you spread them over a larger number of users, the cheaper it gets. This is why I support 'subsidies' for mass transit, even going so far as making it completely 'free' (fareless) to encourage people to take it.

Now the wireless thing does make sense. My suspicion however is this is more likely to be true for rail/light rail, than buses? The former has tables and designated seats; the latter do not. Don't most lawyers on the LIRR file their briefs while riding into NYC?

Cell phone use can certainly be done, though I am sure the noise of twenty lawyers discussing lawsuits would be rather annoying chatter. :)

roughstuff

What is interesting in your calculations/discussion is that you did not consider your driving time "wasted" time... something to consider.

Now as for the 20 lawyers in a bus... isn't that the punch line of a joke? Frankly, 20 lawyers anywhere would be rather annoying...