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

[Iskandar Baharuddin <brengsek@highway1.com.au>]

k_vaughan2@hotmail.com wrote:
> 
> 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.

Do you happen to know the fare-box ratio?

snip


-- 
Regards,

Izzy

"Stop the world - I want to get off!"