Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Friday before the stormFollow

#102 Sep 02 2011 at 6:27 AM Rating: Good
gbaji wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
Is Gbaji seriously suggesting that Eske's destination isn't connected to the world by asphalt and that there might not be other factors which still make the train a more attractive option?


*cough* The "other factors" are the point I'm making. It's just absolutely bizarre to me to be so dependent on public transportation to get somewhere.


Debalic wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
Is Gbaji seriously suggesting that Eske's destination isn't connected to the world by asphalt and that there might not be other factors which still make the train a more attractive option?


*cough* The "other factors" are the point I'm making. It's just absolutely bizarre to me to be so dependent on public transportation to get somewhere.

When was the last time *you* tried to park in Manhattan?
At least Manhattan is easy to navigate. Boston can be a warren of one way streets. If you aren't familiar with the city, it can be hard as **** to even get to where you are going, and then you are going to pay out the *** to park.

I never drive in Boston if I can help it. I can park at the horse track in Revere for free, then use the T to get anywhere I need in the city. Public transportation is almost a godsend, really.
____________________________
Edited, Mar 21st 2011 2:14pm by Darqflame Lock Thread: Because Lubriderm is silly... ~ de geso

Almalieque wrote:
I know what a glory hole is, but I wasn't sure what the business part was in reference to.

My Anime List
#103 Sep 02 2011 at 7:16 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Admiral Lubriderm wrote:
Boston can be a warren of one way streets.

The maze of one-way streets is a conspiracy to make you use public transportation. City planners in the 1700s had it out for you.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#104 Sep 02 2011 at 7:32 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,327 posts
Despite the fact that Portland ME is about a 15th the size of Minneapolis, when I moved from the latter to the former I was pretty intimidated.

Mpls is a grid, the east-west streets consecutively numbered and at right angles to the north-south alphabetically named avenues. Portland is a spiderweb with no naming strategies at all.

The old coastal town roadways are ruled by topography. The naming strategies are localized. We have one fairly major road that is posted as the Gray Road while in Portland. But when you take it to Gray the name is posted as The Portland Road. The 911 compliance stuff helped with some naming, but the roads are still a mess.

The saving grace of Atlantic coastal cities is when you become terribly lost you just need to head east and eventually you'll reach the ocean.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
Post and be happy!
#105 Sep 02 2011 at 7:36 AM Rating: Good
******
44,522 posts
Elinda wrote:
The naming strategies are localized.
Always found that silly.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#106 Sep 02 2011 at 8:27 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Elinda wrote:
The saving grace of Atlantic coastal cities is when you become terribly lost you just need to head east and eventually you'll reach the ocean.

I say close to the same thing when driving in Chicago, "If we get lost, we can always just head east until we hit water."
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#107 Sep 02 2011 at 8:48 AM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
******
20,053 posts
That's the problem with Manhattan: it's an island, so anywhere you go you hit water. "Is this the East or Hudson River?"
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#108 Sep 02 2011 at 9:05 AM Rating: Good
******
44,522 posts
Easy to tell which is which. Just count the bodies.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#109 Sep 02 2011 at 7:28 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,966 posts
Sir Xsarus wrote:
You're confusing city planning with natural disasters.


No, I'm not. I'm saying that city planning can amplify or minimize the effect that a natural disaster has on people's mobility. And planning that heavily relies on mass transit amplifies the impact of any natural disaster which affects that mass transit system.

Quote:
But I guess "cities that don't do this" don't ever have any kind of inclement weather.


Of course they do. But if the mass transit system in my town is down, it has very little impact on anyone. It certainly would not ever make anyone have to start their commute 2 hours earlier. Roads tend to get cleared faster than rails do. Doubly so underground rail systems after a storm.

Quote:
Why are you using a blatantly and completely unusual situation in your argument?


Because the post I was responding to was detailing the effect that this "completely unusual situation" had on the mass transit system, and the changes this forced her to make in order to be able to get to work. WTF?

Quote:
At least go and pull up a slightly normal example of mass transit.


It's crappy under normal conditions too. But even more crappy when a storm comes along.



It's just that it's completely alien to people living on the west coast to even think about that level of dependence (or even use) of mass transit. We use them in the rare occasions that it's convenient. And honestly many of us do feel that some planning groups deliberately manipulate things to make it "more convenient" than driving. You ride the bus if you don't own a car. You take the trolley only if the place you're going doesn't have sufficient parking (which leads to the whole "they didn't make enough parking deliberately to make us take the **** trolley" bit).

That's it. I would *never* commute to work by train or bus. I can get to just about any location in San Diego county in 30 minutes or less by car (and it's not a small county). By bus/trolley, it might take a couple hours to get anywhere, even places that I could drive to in under 10 minutes. I just can't comprehend that people would give up the freedom of self transportation to be packed like cattle into trains and taken somewhere near where they want to go from somewhere semi-near where they started and don't even seem to realize that this is far from the best way to get around.


And I *really* can't comprehend getting into my car 2 hours earlier to drive it to a train station, and then taking the train somewhere. Um... Why not just drive my car where I need to go? And yes, I get that this is New York. But had the city spent half as much money as they've spent over the last 50 years building subways building wider roads, bridges, and better parking, you'd be able to get where you need to go. And if they'd adopted that sort of model, the businesses wouldn't have to be so packed in together in the first place. It's because of the limited locations of mass transit that things get more and more tight. Go with a more spread out model, and you have more space for everything and you don't need the mass transit anymore (or at least not as much).


I know we've had this debate before, and I fully admit this is my personal preference talking. But to me, it's just so much better to spread things out than to crowd them together. It really does seem like a focus on mass transit feeds on itself over time. Because you have it, you don't build as good a road system. More people use it. Business become dependent on where the exit points are and concentrate there. Housing has to be packed more to make it proximate to the transit as well. Over time, this affects the design of your city.

I prefer it like we do on the West coast. More room, more freedom. Better.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#110 Sep 02 2011 at 7:52 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
So your argument is that New York should use up more of some of the most valuable real estate in the world on more roads and parking lots? With the benefit being that LESS buildings will take up space that could be used for more cars?

Brilliant!

If you think mass transit is the reason why East Coast cities are cramped mazes, you need to buy a history book. Or, you know, keep your "mass transit conspiracy" tinfoil hat on.

Edited, Sep 2nd 2011 8:53pm by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#111 Sep 02 2011 at 8:01 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
12,018 posts
gbaji wrote:
It's just that it's completely alien to people living on the west coast to even think about that level of dependence (or even use) of mass transit


Smiley: dubious

Have you ever been up the west coast? Like out of California? To say Portland or Seattle or no?
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#112 Sep 02 2011 at 10:09 PM Rating: Good
****
6,470 posts
We need a smiley that's perpetually digging its own grave deeper.

Edited, Sep 3rd 2011 12:10am by Eske
____________________________
Latest Articles:
Monaco: What's Yours is Mine Review

Follow me on Twitter!
#113 Sep 02 2011 at 11:01 PM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
******
20,053 posts
Yeah, because Los Angeles' highway system is a pinnacle of efficiency and mobility.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#114 Sep 02 2011 at 11:27 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Honestly, Gbaji just has no clue what he's talking about but he saw something he could whine over and will dig himself in and keep *********

He's comparing a city with a population density of 4k per sq mile to one with 27k per sq mile and saying "Hey, how cumzit you guys just don't make more roads?! You love subways too much!! That's why you gots all them buildings!! Man, you guys are silly!!"
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#115 Sep 03 2011 at 6:32 AM Rating: Good
Gbaji's problem with public transportation is pretty obvious. He'd have to be around people of other races, and would need to control his 'urges' (no marks) when around female passengers.
____________________________
Edited, Mar 21st 2011 2:14pm by Darqflame Lock Thread: Because Lubriderm is silly... ~ de geso

Almalieque wrote:
I know what a glory hole is, but I wasn't sure what the business part was in reference to.

My Anime List
#116 Sep 04 2011 at 4:31 AM Rating: Excellent
Gbaji wrote:

I prefer it like we do on the West coast. More room, more freedom. Better.


More smog & some of the worst traffic known to man?

You keep your cars, I'll keep my $57 a month pass that gets me, well, anywhere in & around my city per month. Oh, & the $10 it costs me to get a zipcar for an hour if I need to do some shopping? That includes gas, motherfucker.

Ya, it sucked not being able to get home Sunday morning due to THE ONE TIME in the 11 years I've lived in Boston that the T got shut down. But, i work at a hotel, so it worked out.
____________________________
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin


#117 Sep 04 2011 at 8:32 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Omegavegeta wrote:
Gbaji wrote:
I prefer it like we do on the West coast. More room, more freedom. Better.

More smog & some of the worst traffic known to man?

Joy of living in a glorified suburb. I saw a photo of the San Diego skyline and it looks like Oakbrook or Evanston Illinois.

Speaking of, I saw a pic of the LA skyline on Wiki and man is that ugly. It looks like Sim City.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#118 Sep 04 2011 at 9:39 AM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
******
20,053 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Omegavegeta wrote:
Gbaji wrote:
I prefer it like we do on the West coast. More room, more freedom. Better.

More smog & some of the worst traffic known to man?

Joy of living in a glorified suburb. I saw a photo of the San Diego skyline and it looks like Oakbrook or Evanston Illinois.

Speaking of, I saw a pic of the LA skyline on Wiki and man is that ugly. It looks like Sim City.

That's the LA skyline? Awww, it's so cute! It's like, half of midtown Manhattan.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#119 Sep 04 2011 at 10:00 AM Rating: Good
******
44,522 posts
Debalic wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
Omegavegeta wrote:
Gbaji wrote:
I prefer it like we do on the West coast. More room, more freedom. Better.
More smog & some of the worst traffic known to man?
Joy of living in a glorified suburb. I saw a photo of the San Diego skyline and it looks like Oakbrook or Evanston Illinois.

Speaking of, I saw a pic of the LA skyline on Wiki and man is that ugly. It looks like Sim City.
That's the LA skyline? Awww, it's so cute! It's like, half of midtown Manhattan.
It's like a city block that wants to grow into a real city one day.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#120 Sep 04 2011 at 10:57 AM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
******
20,053 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
Debalic wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
Omegavegeta wrote:
Gbaji wrote:
I prefer it like we do on the West coast. More room, more freedom. Better.
More smog & some of the worst traffic known to man?
Joy of living in a glorified suburb. I saw a photo of the San Diego skyline and it looks like Oakbrook or Evanston Illinois.

Speaking of, I saw a pic of the LA skyline on Wiki and man is that ugly. It looks like Sim City.
That's the LA skyline? Awww, it's so cute! It's like, half of midtown Manhattan.
It's like a city block that wants to grow into a real city one day.

I once made the same comment driving past Indianapolis one evening. It was like, two square city blocks sitting by itself in the middle of a field of oil refineries. It looked like Jersey City.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#121 Sep 04 2011 at 12:08 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Debalic wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
Speaking of, I saw a pic of the LA skyline on Wiki and man is that ugly. It looks like Sim City.
That's the LA skyline? Awww, it's so cute! It's like, half of midtown Manhattan.

Size aside (and I thought/said the same thing about Indianapolis, btw), I mean what I said. It literally looks like Sim City. Minus the spider-monster.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#122 Sep 04 2011 at 4:57 PM Rating: Good
**
479 posts
Joph wrote:
I say close to the same thing when driving in Chicago, "If we get lost, we can always just head east until we hit water."


This. Chicago got it right with the southside of the city, well south of State Street anyway. All the east-west streets are numbered. It's that **** northside that's screwy...all those rich people up there and their fancy names.
____________________________
Jophiel wrote:
Pack your own lunch and bring nothing but Pixie Stix and Pop Rocks and get your liberty on.
#123 Sep 06 2011 at 4:29 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,966 posts
Jophiel wrote:
He's comparing a city with a population density of 4k per sq mile to one with 27k per sq mile and saying "Hey, how cumzit you guys just don't make more roads?! You love subways too much!! That's why you gots all them buildings!! Man, you guys are silly!!"


Has it occurred to you that the reason the population density is 7 times higher is *because* of mass transit? Had they chosen to take a different route, the city itself would have built up differently. Instead of everything being in one central location, you'd have businesses spread out.

You comment about the relative size of downtown LA, but what you miss is that there are a half dozen other "downtown" type office complexes spread out around the county. The exact same total number of businesses and the same amount of money flowing in and out, but not all focused in one area. The point being that had New York not decided to build along a mass transit model, she probably wouldn't work on Manhattan island in the first place, and those who do would be smaller in number and would more easily be able to get in and out.


Mass transit creates the need for itself. It artificially forces businesses and residences to be built in greater density around the exit points of the mass transit system itself. It's not "better". But like many things that liberals like, it has the side effect of forcing people to be more dependent on the government. Shocking how frequently that little side effect crops up.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#124 Sep 06 2011 at 4:32 PM Rating: Good
******
44,522 posts
gbaji wrote:
would more easily be able to get in and out.
It's so cute when country bumpkins think it's difficult to move about in New York
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#125 Sep 06 2011 at 4:34 PM Rating: Good
****
6,470 posts
Gbaji, you must be trollin'.

Edited, Sep 6th 2011 6:36pm by Eske
____________________________
Latest Articles:
Monaco: What's Yours is Mine Review

Follow me on Twitter!
#126 Sep 06 2011 at 5:29 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,966 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
gbaji wrote:
would more easily be able to get in and out.
It's so cute when country bumpkins think it's difficult to move about in New York


I didn't say it was difficult to "move about in" New York. I said it was difficult to get "in and out" of New York (Manhattan specifically). And it is. This whole conversation was sparked by the fact that mass transit is so necessary to getting there that leaving the house 2 hours earlier to get parking at an open train station was still preferable to attempting any other method.

I just found that amazing and felt it was worth commenting on. Feel free to debate the benefits of mass transit if you want, but it seems somewhat silly for you to basically attempt to deny that the issue exists at all. Clearly, it does. Else she wouldn't have had to get up 2 hours earlier to get to work.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#127 Sep 06 2011 at 5:34 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,966 posts
Eske Esquire wrote:
Gbaji, you must be trollin'.


/shrug. I happen to live in one of the larger metropolitan areas of the US which hasn't (yet) succumbed to the assumption that cities must be modeled on ever increasingly dense populations connected by increasingly necessary mass transit systems. And I believe that it's much much better to not adopt that model if you can. To be fair, cities like New York and Chicago had grown probably to the point (or near) of requiring mass transit before cars became commonly affordable, but it's still a point to make in terms of future city growth and planning.


I see the designs of those older large cities as examples of what *not* to do.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#128 Sep 06 2011 at 5:39 PM Rating: Good
******
44,522 posts
gbaji wrote:
And it is.
Except it isn't. *edit* Wait, wait, I think I get it. When you say it's hard to get in and out of Manhattan, you mean it's hard for country yokels like you, who are unaccustomed to real cities, to get in and out, right? I mean, I don't know a single New Yorker that has any difficulty getting anywhere in the city. That's the only explanation there could be for your insistence to the contrary.

I find it most amusing that you're harping on delays on mass transit where two to three feet of water was flooding the streets, and you're trying to praise the place that's roads were closed over three inches of snow at the same time.

But now, I kind of feel pity for you. You'd have to try everything in your power to praise your failure of a system, considering how much more you pay for transportation than I do. If I was forced into doing things that waste my money with no other options, I'd try to make it sound better, too.

Edited, Sep 6th 2011 7:45pm by lolgaxe
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#129 Sep 06 2011 at 6:06 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
Has it occurred to you that the reason the population density is 7 times higher is *because* of mass transit?

Yeah, it's not. Crack open a history book.
Quote:
You comment about the relative size of downtown LA

Mainly I commented on how ugly and devoid of interest it is and how it looks like the cookie-cutter models from an old computer game.

Edited, Sep 6th 2011 7:07pm by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#130 Sep 06 2011 at 7:10 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,966 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
gbaji wrote:
And it is.
Except it isn't. Wait, wait, I think I get it. When you say it's hard to get in and out of Manhattan, you mean it's hard for country yokels like you, who are unaccustomed to real cities, to get in and out, right? I mean, I don't know a single New Yorker that has any difficulty getting anywhere in the city. That's the only explanation there could be for your insistence to the contrary.


No. I mean that it's hard to get in or out of the city without using mass transit. Try to keep up with the conversation.

Quote:
I find it most amusing that you're harping on delays on mass transit where two to three feet of water was flooding the streets, and you're trying to praise the place that's roads were closed over three inches of snow at the same time.


Huh? Where the **** do you think I live?

I just find it amazing how those who live in cities with such major mass transit systems are so accepting of their nearly complete dependence on them *and* of the delays and problems associated with them. In my entire lifetime I have never ever ever not been able to get somewhere because a road was closed, or a train was closed, no matter what weather, earthquakes, sunspots, sports events, or whatever else was going on. Every year we hear about people unable to get to work because Amtrak closes a section of line, or the subway system in a city is closed for some reason.

And the people who use them just accept it! That's what's so surprising to me.

Quote:
But now, I kind of feel pity for you. You'd have to try everything in your power to praise your failure of a system, considering how much more you pay for transportation than I do. If I was forced into doing things that waste my money with no other options, I'd try to make it sound better, too.


How much more do I pay than you? How much of your taxes subsidize the mass transit system in your city? How much do you pay to use the system? Do you own a car anyway? If not, how do you get to places where the mass transit doesn't go? You just never bother to visit anyone who isn't connected to you by rail or bus?

The point in this particular example was Eske driving to a train station 2 hours earlier than normal because of disruptions in the service. Think about that. She still owns a car. She pays for that car. She presumably uses it to drive lots of other places. She is *forced* to take a train in to work because that's where her work is and that's the only reasonable way to get there. My point is that if you eliminated the trains, her work would not be packed into a physical location with so many other businesses such that she could only get there by train.


It's a self creating problem. And those who praise it simply haven't lived in areas where those things don't exist. You know how long my daily commute is? About 10 minutes. Why? Because the way my city is set up, businesses are spread out around the city and county. Meaning that it's pretty easy to find a place to live that is relatively close to where you work in most cases. But the mass transit model has the people living at one end of a train or bus line and most of the jobs packed tightly into another end of that train or bus line.


It really isn't a better way of doing it. It's slower, requires more movement of people, costs a huge amount of money, and increases the populations dependence on the government run system.

Edited, Sep 6th 2011 6:16pm by gbaji
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#131 Sep 06 2011 at 7:12 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,966 posts
Jophiel wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Has it occurred to you that the reason the population density is 7 times higher is *because* of mass transit?

Yeah, it's not. Crack open a history book.
Quote:
You comment about the relative size of downtown LA

Mainly I commented on how ugly and devoid of interest it is and how it looks like the cookie-cutter models from an old computer game.


Thank God I don't live in LA then! How's this for a better skyline?

Edited, Sep 6th 2011 6:14pm by gbaji
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#132 Sep 06 2011 at 7:21 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
12,018 posts
They put my job on top of a hill because that's where the land was that was gifted to them like 150 years ago. Because of its awkward location on said hill, there's not enough room for the employees to park. There's a 7-year waiting list for a $120+/mo parking pass, which is outside my price range anyway. All that means I'm very happy to take the bus, especially since I'm often too tired to drive these days anyway. Smiley: rolleyes
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#133 Sep 06 2011 at 7:22 PM Rating: Good
******
30,643 posts
I'll be going from this:

Screenshot

to this:

Screenshot


(if Google can be believed.)
#134 Sep 06 2011 at 7:24 PM Rating: Good
******
44,522 posts
gbaji wrote:
No. I mean that it's hard to get in or out of the city without using mass transit.
Which is wrong.
gbaji wrote:
Try keeping up with the conversation.
Try being accurate.
gbaji wrote:
Huh? Where the **** do you think I live?
Somewhere you believe is a city.
gbaji wrote:
In my entire lifetime I have never ever ever not been able to get somewhere because a road was closed, or a train was closed, no matter what weather, earthquakes, sunspots, sports events, or whatever else was going on.
Neither have I, what's your point? Still operating under the country hick assumption that if mass transit goes down that us city fo'k are stranded? Smiley: laugh

Edited, Sep 6th 2011 9:24pm by lolgaxe
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#135 Sep 06 2011 at 7:26 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,966 posts
someproteinguy wrote:
They put my job on top of a hill because that's where the land was that was gifted to them like 150 years ago. Because of its awkward location on said hill, there's not enough room for the employees to park. There's a 7-year waiting list for a $120+/mo parking pass, which is outside my price range anyway. All that means I'm very happy to take the bus, especially since I'm often too tired to drive these days anyway. Smiley: rolleyes


You work at an observatory or something? That seems pretty bizarre really.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#136 Sep 06 2011 at 7:31 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,966 posts
Is this going to be another one of those times where you post stupid stuff just to be contrary? Cause that's what it looks like.

lolgaxe wrote:
gbaji wrote:
No. I mean that it's hard to get in or out of the city without using mass transit.
Which is wrong.


And yet, Eske left home in her car 2 hours early in order to take the train into work. So it's at least sufficient hardship to make that worth her while. Debalic certainly agreed that it was nearly impossible to park in Manhattan as well.

You're denying a given to the debate we're having. WTF?

Quote:
gbaji wrote:
Try keeping up with the conversation.
Try being accurate.


I am. This entire discussion revolves around the assumption that driving into Manhattan is so much of a hardship that leaving home two hours early in order to drive to a different train station is worth it. That's the conversation we're having. I'm not sure why you've decided to jump into the middle of it and deny something everyone else has already agreed to.

Quote:
Still operating under the country hick assumption that if mass transit goes down that us city fo'k are stranded? Smiley: laugh


And yet, that's exactly what happened, isn't it?
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#137 Sep 06 2011 at 7:35 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
12,018 posts
gbaji wrote:
someproteinguy wrote:
They put my job on top of a hill because that's where the land was that was gifted to them like 150 years ago. Because of its awkward location on said hill, there's not enough room for the employees to park. There's a 7-year waiting list for a $120+/mo parking pass, which is outside my price range anyway. All that means I'm very happy to take the bus, especially since I'm often too tired to drive these days anyway. Smiley: rolleyes


You work at an observatory or something? That seems pretty bizarre really.


Hospital.

Someone from a railroad company bought land 'near downtown' sight unseen, thinking it'd be a good place for a depot. Years later they discovered the land was on top of a hill, and the grade made it impractical for rail. The land was donated to the state, and the biggest hospital in the city is now located on top of a hill and is nearly inaccessible to ambulances during the winter storms.

Smiley: oyvey

Edited, Sep 6th 2011 6:35pm by someproteinguy
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#138 Sep 06 2011 at 7:36 PM Rating: Good
******
44,522 posts
gbaji wrote:
And yet, that's exactly what happened, isn't it?
Nope, but it's the lynchpin to your argument so you'll just keep trying to say it did happen. I only live and work here, what would I know of New York? Obviously you're the expert on city livin', Boss Hogg. Smiley: lol
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#139 Sep 06 2011 at 7:41 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
Thank God I don't live in LA then! How's this for a better skyline?

Is that the suburb of some real city?
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#140 Sep 06 2011 at 7:47 PM Rating: Excellent
Gurue
*****
16,289 posts
Eske's a girl??
#141 Sep 06 2011 at 8:00 PM Rating: Good
******
30,643 posts
Nadenu wrote:
Eske's a girl??


Nope.
#142 Sep 06 2011 at 8:01 PM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
******
20,053 posts
gbaji wrote:
Thank God I don't live in LA then! How's this for a better skyline?

Quaint. No wonder you don't have transportation problems; rural villages rarely do.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#143 Sep 06 2011 at 8:07 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,966 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
gbaji wrote:
And yet, that's exactly what happened, isn't it?
Nope, but it's the lynchpin to your argument so you'll just keep trying to say it did happen.


Are you retarded? Seriously WTF?
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#144 Sep 06 2011 at 8:08 PM Rating: Good
******
44,522 posts
Belkira the Tulip wrote:
Nadenu wrote:
Eske's a girl??
Nope.
gbaji keeps saying it, so Eske must be a girl.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#145 Sep 06 2011 at 8:09 PM Rating: Good
******
44,522 posts
gbaji wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
gbaji wrote:
And yet, that's exactly what happened, isn't it?
Nope, but it's the lynchpin to your argument so you'll just keep trying to say it did happen.
Are you retarded? Seriously WTF?
Brilliant retort. I'd think you'd be used to being wrong all the time by now.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#146 Sep 06 2011 at 8:09 PM Rating: Excellent
****
6,470 posts
gbaji wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
gbaji wrote:
No. I mean that it's hard to get in or out of the city without using mass transit.
Which is wrong.


And yet, Eske left home in her car 2 hours early in order to take the train into work. So it's at least sufficient hardship to make that worth her while. Debalic certainly agreed that it was nearly impossible to park in Manhattan as well.

You're denying a given to the debate we're having. WTF?


You keep using that example, and it's a poor one.

My leaving 2 hours early (which was hyperbole, but I suppose we're beyond that, now) was for multiple reasons, most of which fall under the "money" header. Getting into the city using mass transit is nice and cheap compared to driving in. The train saves on what would be a brutal gas cost for daily trips in and out. It saves money, it lets me live further out from the city, which I like, and it's almost never an issue. No, don't try to springboard off that and say that this proves your point. It does not.

I'm trying really hard to not get sucked into this one. I know much, much more about city planning than you do. Much more. You don't know anything about it. You've got "I just wikipedia'd some sh*t"-level intelligence about it. Except you didn't even do that. You just conjured up some stuff that you think supports your argument, neglecting the massive fallacies and historical inaccuracies of them. It's pathetic.

Of course, you're not going to just politely bow out and admit that you're just making shit up that sounds good. Wouldn't if I gave you a dissertation proving, point by point, why you're talking out of your ***. So I'm just going to leave it at that, and call you an idiot.

Edited, Sep 6th 2011 10:10pm by Eske
____________________________
Latest Articles:
Monaco: What's Yours is Mine Review

Follow me on Twitter!
#147 Sep 06 2011 at 8:15 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,966 posts
Debalic wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Thank God I don't live in LA then! How's this for a better skyline?

Quaint. No wonder you don't have transportation problems; rural villages rarely do.


Now you're just being silly. It's not my fault that I live in such a vastly superior city to where most of you have to live. Not sure if it's about being smarter or luckier or what, but I'll take it!


San Diego is the 8th largest city and the 6th largest county by population in the US. We're like the 48th largest metropolitan area though. Want to know why? Because we are more spread out. As a result, we don't have the same kind of traffic issues that other large counties have. We don't have the same ridiculous commute times, and we don't have to build a huge expensive public transit system. Sadly, some idiot liberals keep trying to foist a larger transit system on us, but aside from some stupid and counterproductive success with the Trolley system, we've largely kept them at bay.


And we're much much much better off for it.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#148 Sep 06 2011 at 8:18 PM Rating: Good
******
44,522 posts
gbaji wrote:
San Diego is the 8th largest city and the 6th largest county by population in the US.
Proud of eighth place, huh. Second is the best of the losers. Keep telling us how amazing your pig farm is, though. It amuses me.

You know. From a real city dweller point of view.

Edited, Sep 6th 2011 10:20pm by lolgaxe
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#149 Sep 06 2011 at 8:18 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Eske Esquire wrote:
I'm trying really hard to not get sucked into this one. I know much, much more about city planning than you do. Much more. You don't know anything about it. You've got "I just wikipedia'd some sh*t"-level intelligence about it. Except you didn't even do that. You just conjured up some stuff that you think supports your argument, neglecting the massive fallacies and historical inaccuracies of them. It's pathetic.

Shades of the NYC mosque argument and Gbaji trying to lecture me on zoning and the building/construction permitting process Smiley: laugh
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#150 Sep 06 2011 at 8:24 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
lolgaxe wrote:
gbaji wrote:
San Diego is the 8th largest city and the 6th largest county by population in the US.
Proud of eighth place, huh.

It's a pretty sharp scale as well. Chicago is twice as populous as San Diego and New York three times more populous than Chicago.

That's just city size, not metro area where San Diego plummets to 17th place. But, since we're discussing commutes, metro area is probably more important than city limits.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#151 Sep 06 2011 at 8:34 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,966 posts
Eske Esquire wrote:
My leaving 2 hours early (which was hyperbole, but I suppose we're beyond that, now) was for multiple reasons, most of which fall under the "money" header.


IIRC, you said that the train station closest to your house wasn't working, and you'd have to drive to another one farther away, but that this station didn't have enough parking, so you left 2 hours early to ensure that you could park at that station in order to ride the train in to work.

Quote:
Getting into the city using mass transit is nice and cheap compared to driving in. The train saves on what would be a brutal gas cost for daily trips in and out. It saves money, it lets me live further out from the city, which I like, and it's almost never an issue.


I understand the financial argument. But my point is that the difference in cost is so great *because* the system was built deliberately to make it that way. You talk about living further out from the city, but what if the city wasn't where all the jobs were focused in? What if 90% of the businesses on Manhattan island were spread out in various business parks throughout the surrounding area? Wouldn't it then be more likely that you could have found employment that was just as good as where you are working now, but that wasn't "in the city" and to which you could commute quickly and easily by car?


Quote:
I know much, much more about city planning than you do. Much more. You don't know anything about it.


You might just know much more about how cities plan within already existing assumptions. I'm talking about changing the assumptions themselves. You live and work in a city where that mass transit decision was made several generations ago. It's probably hard for you to comprehend how things might have been built differently.

I'm living in a city where we have avoided the mass transit issue, but some are trying to force it on us. In my lifetime I've seen some of our city planners talk people into building a trolley system, then when it didn't make enough money, use the needs of the trolley system as a lever to change city planning. The literally chose to expand or create certain downtown sites specifically to make use of the mass transit system which wasn't paying for itself. Right now, there is talk of moving the stadium from the nearly perfect location it is at, to the increasingly congested downtown area. Why? There are plenty of better places. But that way they can put it somewhere where there's no sufficient parking and no way to get there, so people will have to take the trolley to get there.

Heck. They've already done this to a degree. Even at the existing site, they jacked up the price of parking (by about 400%) to help offset the cost of building a spur line out to the stadium. Why? Well, because it's "better" to get people to ride the mass transit system of course! So now a bunch of people ride the trolley to get to games, not because there isn't plenty of parking, and aren't plenty of routes in and out, but because they artificially increased the cost of parking to force people to pay for a trolley ticket instead.


So excuse me if I don't buy that line. In my experience watching this conflict first hand (which I'll bet you never have) what I've seen is that mass transit systems end out forcing changes to city planning that are not beneficial to the public but serve to justify the costs of the mass transit system itself. As I said earlier, it's a self created problem. Don't build it in the first place, and your city doesn't concentrate beyond that which your road system can handle, and you don't need the mass transit system.

The total amount of business in an area is exactly the same whether you concentrate it all in one downtown area or not. The theory that concentrating shops and business somehow amplifies money flow is flawed economics at best, and flat out wrong at worst. Why on earth would I take a train into a busy and crowded city center if I could access the same shops and restaurants and venues distributed across the whole county? And because they are spread out, there isn't heavy traffic getting to any one location.


Open your mind. There are newer and better ways of designing cities. Some of us realize this. Others stick dogmatically to what they were taught in some classroom somewhere.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 52 All times are in CST
Kavekkk, Kuwoobie, Technogeek, trickybeck, Xsarus, Anonymous Guests (47)