On Sun, 16 Sep 2007, Ronn! Blankenship wrote:

> At 10:06 PM Sunday 9/16/2007, Dan Minettte wrote:
>
>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
>>> Behalf Of Martin Lewis
>>> Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2007 4:36 AM
>>> To: Killer Bs Discussion
>>> Subject: Re: Car free London?
>>
>>>
>>>  The conversation went like this:
>>>
>>>  Gary makes a massive strawman about forcing people to walk.
>>
>> Well, technically, the proposal doesn't force people to walk.  There could
>> be mass transit on each and every street, I suppose.  It's just that any
>> realistic implementation of the proposal would force people who are not
>> capable of walking moderately long distances to do so.
>>
>> I think that the main difference between you and others is that you envision
>> a practical way to have no cars in London without making people walk and
>> others, including me, don't.
>
>
>
> If this is the case, I for one would be interested in hearing what that 
> way is, because like Dan I haven't been able to think of a way to do 
> that.
>
>
> -- Ronn!  :)

I will grant this -- my friend who is mobility-impaired to the point of 
qualifying for a handicap space hangtag, but usually doesn't require a 
wheelchair, was able to get around Chicago without anything beyond the 
public transit system.  It may be that those of us living in areas that 
are less densely populated and without terribly good public transit 
systems really can't grok how good the existing infrastructure in London 
is.  Having never been to London myself (having never been in England, in 
fact), I couldn't say one way or another.

In fact, if you strung the wires for electric trolleys in enough of the 
Boston area, you could probably do OK there with a similarly draconian 
proposal if there were an additional plan for people who realy needed 
door-to-door service, and I have lived within the area served by the MBTA. 
(Granted, that was 30 years ago, but my mother never needed a car, and 
never needed a cab except to get to the airport and the doctor's office.)

Given how dense a lot of us have been on this topic and having specific 
objections, however, it might have been nice for someone to explain just 
what the "obvious" point we were missing was, instead of dismissing the 
arguments made without a clear explanation.  Assuming someone is in 
possession of all the facts *and experiences* that you are is a great 
shortcut to miscommunication.

        Julia

_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Reply via email to