Just Say "No!" to the Chicago Car Show
03-05-05, 07:24 PM
#126
Deported by koffee
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: So. Cal
Posts: 1,187
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Originally Posted by FXjohn
Does that consider the cost of paying a bus driver, wages, health benefits and retirement?
Almot forgot aboyut the wages of the maintenance crew also, and the dedicated fuel storage, etc etc.
There's more to it than gallons divided by people per mile.
Almot forgot aboyut the wages of the maintenance crew also, and the dedicated fuel storage, etc etc.
There's more to it than gallons divided by people per mile.
03-05-05, 07:35 PM
#127
Senior Member
Originally Posted by allgoo19
nick burns original comment clearly states that it's energy-wise. It seems like FXjohn is trying to derail it into cost-wise. FXjohn, do you have a reliable data that contradicts nick burns information? Let's see it.
Energy=money by definition and Vis-a-versa
wasted money and wasted energy are equally bad, because one equals the other.
03-05-05, 09:50 PM
#128
Newbie
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 3
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Great.....so you intolerant and humorless' ban the car'zealots (hey..'Bicycle Taliban'certainly is apt~!) posting on this forum admit that obstructing & prohibiting cars in your real agenda...Your working to eventually make walking, bicycling, and compulsory public transportation the only legal mobility mode in your ideal carless world...right~!~?
And regardless that those traffic calming control and restriction devices, that you endlessly promote (Ironically in the name of "bicycle safety"~!), ARE known TRIP HAZARDS for bicycles, and they are also known to significantly INCREASE tail pipe emissions.~!~!~!~....but that's ok with you because they punish motorists (and cyclists~!) and supposedly improve pedestrian safety....
What incredible nonsense~!!!!
Needless to say your not making bicycle sense...
Based on how you described your radical Critical Mass car free goals that you've stated here.. clearly you are anti-car zealots and you certainly don't represent responsible bicycle advocacy.
Cheers
And regardless that those traffic calming control and restriction devices, that you endlessly promote (Ironically in the name of "bicycle safety"~!), ARE known TRIP HAZARDS for bicycles, and they are also known to significantly INCREASE tail pipe emissions.~!~!~!~....but that's ok with you because they punish motorists (and cyclists~!) and supposedly improve pedestrian safety....
What incredible nonsense~!!!!
Needless to say your not making bicycle sense...
Based on how you described your radical Critical Mass car free goals that you've stated here.. clearly you are anti-car zealots and you certainly don't represent responsible bicycle advocacy.
Cheers
03-06-05, 12:58 AM
#130
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: in bed with your mom
Posts: 13,696
Bikes: who cares?
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
Originally Posted by Rowan
Warning
Don't Feed The Trolls!
Don't Feed The Trolls!
03-06-05, 01:05 AM
#131
Deported by koffee
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: So. Cal
Posts: 1,187
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Originally Posted by FXjohn
Energy=money by definition and Vis-a-versa
wasted money and wasted energy are equally bad, because one equals the other.
wasted money and wasted energy are equally bad, because one equals the other.
When you look at things and try to analyze it, you get as much as information you can get and not just what you want to see. nick burns information based on the fuel consumption divide by miles divide by head conts is certaily a simple useful way to look at it. It's certainly different from adding all the cost involves. Even when you decide to add all the cost, it'll be many different way based on the person's interpretation. For example, if you fly 1000miles by air, air fair is the most of the cost. When you travel by a car, you have to add the cost of meals, place to stay, which adds even more than nick burns information. What I asked you in my original question is to have you present the information, analysis, that you believe more adequate. Let's see your part of information and let the rest of us analyze it. It's not a good way to reject a information just because you don't like it or what it represents. You get the information from both side then make your own decision, that's what I would do.
Now I ask you two things. One I already asked, energy-wise comparison data among different transportation. Another is cost-wise which involves all the hidden costs.
Convince us.
