Re: High population density is good for bikes

Pat wrote:
> On Mar 5, 8:05 pm, Miles Bader <mi...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> Pat <gro...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> writes:
>>> It's not that I just want to whine, it is that I think that many of
>>> the posts are extraordinarily ego-centric and arogant.  You want to
>>> live in some manner and think that everyone else should live in that
>>> manner too.  There is a feeling of moral snugness and superiority that
>>> is appalling.
>> You have just described your own posts, to a "t".  This is why we mock
you.
>>
>> -Miles
>>
>> --
>> "1971 pickup truck; will trade for guns"
> 
> If you read what I say, not what you think I say, you will know that I
> advocate letting people live the way they want.  Not trying to force
> people to some "norm".  Frankly, I don't give a darn how someone else
> lives.  I just wish others were the same and didn't discuss "banning
> cars" and such.  Live and let live.

Not that there's anything wrong with a locality banning cars if it wants 
to, but who here is talking about banning cars?  The only people who 
ever bring it up are falsely attributing it to others to make them look 
bad, as far as I can tell.

Naturally, talking about reducing the subsidy that goes to cars, or 
making them meet more stringent emissions standards, are not the same 
thing as "banning" them.

As for "live and let live," I'm all for that, but unfortunately the cost 
of maintaining automobile (or other trans****tation, for that matter) 
infrastructure comes out of everyone's pockets.  So it's not that 
simple, sadly.