Re: Cars make more economic sense than transit: (Not the facts)

[k_vaughan2@hotmail.com]

On Wed, 21 Jul 1999 15:01:31 GMT, qldspeed-spamsevil@geocities.com
(qldspeed) wrote:

>On Mon, 19 Jul 1999 10:59:21 +1100, David Bromage
><dbromage@omni.com.au> wrote:
>
>>Mark Gibson wrote:
>>> 
>>> The "study" in question is undoubtedly bogus.  A visit to the Web
>>> site will show that the loons who did the alleged "study" are fanatical
>>> ecowackos who hate cars and modern, road-based transportation systems.
>>
>>So would a report by the NRMA saying the exact opposite be any more credible?
>>
>>Rather than dismissing the report out of hand, I suggest you read it and
>>challenge specific arguments within it.
>
>Mr. Gibson is right!  It would be hard to take such a report seriously
>when you see the style of things that come out of Newman's unit.
>
It would be hard to take any report on motor vehicles from the NRMA
seriously, considering they have the motoring public to protect from
the truth between public transport and motor vehicles costs.

One example it only costed me $30 on the train per week for a weekly
from the Blue Mountains to Parramatta some time back and I think it
would have cost a lot more to run a motor vehicle in the same distant.


So is it the fact that cars make more economic sense then public
transport I don't think so, another example the cost of such things as
crashes for every death I heard cost $1,000,000.
>I've got to say, they all look like "ecowackos" AND left wing loonies
>to me for sure too, but the reader can be the judge... just look at
>this...
>
>     http://wwwistp.murdoch.edu.au/ABOUT/staff.htm#Newman
>
>here's a few from the same stable...
>
> Local Matters: Perspectives on the Globalisation of Technology
>(editor, 1995);
> Markets, Morals and Manifestos: Fightback! and the Politics of
>Economic Rationalism in the  1990s, (ISTP, 1992); 
>The WA Royal Commission: Did it Make a Difference?" in P. Weller,  et
>al., Commissions of Inquiry in Australia 
>
>Research interests include: the role of ideas and 'ideology' in
>shaping public policy; the politics of Australian education policy
>especially higher education policy; political education.
>"Education Policy under Hawke 1983-1989", with D. Smart, in R. Stewart
>and C. Jennett (eds) 
>Consensus and Restructuring: Hawke and Australian Public Policy
>
> 'Can We Build Better Cities?' (with Peter Newman and Jeff Kenworthy)
>in Urban  Futures 3(2), 1994; 
>Transport, Housing and Urban Form, (with Newman and Kenworthy),
>Commonwealth Department of Health, Housing and Community Services,
>1992;
>Transport Services for People with Disabilities , 3 vols., ACROD,
>1994; 
>'Can We Overcome Automobile Dependence? Physical planning in an age of
>urban cynicism', (with Newman and Kenworthy) in Cities, 12(1),
>     1995;
>'Access for All', Current Affairs Bulletin 71(4), 1995; 
>'Planning for Accessible Public Transport: Recent  Australian
>Experience and its Lessons for New Zealand', New Zealand Journal of
>Disability Studies, No. 2, 1996.'
>
>"Sex, God and Public Policy" St Mark's Review, 156; 
>"The Earth Charter and the Ethics of Sustainable Development" Current
>Affairs Bulletin,;
>"Post-Fordist People? Cultural Meanings of the New Production Systems"
>Futures..
>
>
>It's fairly self explanatory - (what the hell is ecofeminism anyway?)
>but there's heaps more amusing reading on the actual web page - well
>worth a look!
>
>Qldspeed
>
>>
>>> >The report is available from Island Press (ISBN 1 55963 660 2), or see
>>> >http://wwwistp.murdoch.edu.au/
>>
>>Cheers
>>David
>
>
>