Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
anrec80
Posts: 2759
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 7:50 am

Re: Should North Americans be limited to one car?

Sat Dec 22, 2018 10:11 pm

Dutchy wrote:
So you suggest the government should pass legislation to limit the freedom of people, while I suggest you need to pay a fair price for polluting and therefore the market will come up with products which will be more efficient because that is what the market wants with high CO2 costs.


Can you elaborate this - what’s “fair price” for polluting? How is it calculated? On a commodity, the fair price is what the buyer and the seller agree to trade at. But on pollution - what is it?
 
aviationaware
Posts: 2858
Joined: Mon May 19, 2014 12:02 pm

Re: Should North Americans be limited to one car?

Sat Dec 22, 2018 10:22 pm

Pi7472000 wrote:
With climate change rapidly increasing and devstating the Earth should people in North America be limited to one car?


Any other marxist ideas besides planned economy that you want to sell us, genius?
 
anrec80
Posts: 2759
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 7:50 am

Re: Should North Americans be limited to one car?

Sat Dec 22, 2018 10:25 pm

ltbewr wrote:
There are ways to limit the number of vehicles in urban areas, some already in use in NA cities. 'Congestion charges' (tax) are imposed to limit the numbers of vehicles operating in certain city areas (like London and on car services/taxis in NYC to go into effect on Jan. 1). No or very limited free street parking in non-residential areas and overall reductions in numbers of street parking sites. High taxes and fees for public parking lots and garages.


I think these “taxi charges” are just a way for the City that’s always broke squeeze some cash out of the remaining middle class taxpayers - users of those services. Yes, they like taxing/tolling without really providing any alternative. Taxing/tolling private vehicles - OK, but what is the alternative that would help people move around? Taxes on taxis/Uber obviously won’t help people give up their private cars.
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 11652
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Should North Americans be limited to one car?

Sat Dec 22, 2018 10:27 pm

anrec80 wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
So you suggest the government should pass legislation to limit the freedom of people, while I suggest you need to pay a fair price for polluting and therefore the market will come up with products which will be more efficient because that is what the market wants with high CO2 costs.


Can you elaborate this - what’s “fair price” for polluting? How is it calculated? On a commodity, the fair price is what the buyer and the seller agree to trade at. But on pollution - what is it?


I understand that your native Russia will suffer economically because you do not have much more to export, but that doesn't matter. The world can't continue to burn your natural "resources". What is a fair price? Well, we can calculate it, if we want, bit of rhetoric trick to ask for a concrete number, number ten in the propaganda workbook.
But if you want a number, it is said that with € 100/ton companies have a real incentive to move to a sustainable society. So let's start there then.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
anrec80
Posts: 2759
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 7:50 am

Re: Should North Americans be limited to one car?

Sat Dec 22, 2018 10:28 pm

aviationaware wrote:
Any other marxist ideas besides planned economy that you want to sell us, genius?


These are not just Marxist ideas anymore. They are now being picked up by all sorts of “greens”, liberals, “social fairness proponents” (read - “take away and split”). They just aren’t saying it aloud. Which just shows that ideas of Karl Marx were at least a couple centuries ahead of their time.
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 11652
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Should North Americans be limited to one car?

Sat Dec 22, 2018 10:33 pm

anrec80 wrote:
ltbewr wrote:
There are ways to limit the number of vehicles in urban areas, some already in use in NA cities. 'Congestion charges' (tax) are imposed to limit the numbers of vehicles operating in certain city areas (like London and on car services/taxis in NYC to go into effect on Jan. 1). No or very limited free street parking in non-residential areas and overall reductions in numbers of street parking sites. High taxes and fees for public parking lots and garages.


I think these “taxi charges” are just a way for the City that’s always broke squeeze some cash out of the remaining middle class taxpayers - users of those services. Yes, they like taxing/tolling without really providing any alternative. Taxing/tolling private vehicles - OK, but what is the alternative that would help people move around? Taxes on taxis/Uber obviously won’t help people give up their private cars.


Ah, there we have your little-hidden agenda, playing "it all comes down to the middle classes", divide and conquer right? Furthermore, it is not true, in inner cities you have lot's of public transport, you do need a taxi or your own car. So congestion charges are a perfectly good way to move forward and clean up the air of the cities a bit.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
User avatar
Tugger
Posts: 10423
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

Re: Should North Americans be limited to one car?

Sat Dec 22, 2018 10:39 pm

anrec80 wrote:
Tugger wrote:
Pi7472000 wrote:
should people in North America be limited to one car

That is already the case, at least for the USA (I am not egotistical enough to think the US is the whole of NA).

There are roughly 330 million people in the USA and only 270 odd million registered vehicles (which includes work vehicles). :spin:

Tugg


Yeah but out of these 330 million - how many people are actually licensed drivers?

Per the website Statisica:
In 2016, there were about 222 million licensed drivers in the United States.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/198 ... -by-state/

And this is supported by BTS (BUREAU OF TRANSPORTATION STATISTICS) data as well:
https://www.bts.gov/content/licensed-drivers

Tugg
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. - W. Shatner
There are many kinds of sentences that we think state facts about the world but that are really just expressions of our attitudes. - F. Ramsey
 
luckyone
Posts: 3028
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 1:50 pm

Re: Should North Americans be limited to one car?

Sat Dec 22, 2018 10:44 pm

anrec80 wrote:
Tugger wrote:
Pi7472000 wrote:
should people in North America be limited to one car

That is already the case, at least for the USA (I am not egotistical enough to think the US is the whole of NA).

There are roughly 330 million people in the USA and only 270 odd million registered vehicles (which includes work vehicles). :spin:

Tugg


Yeah but out of these 330 million - how many people are actually licensed drivers?

According to a three second google search, 222 million.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/198 ... -by-state/

A couple thoughts:
In spite of fuel taxes that stem from an era when automobile traffic was considered a luxury and climate change was just a phrase with two words starting with the same letter, there is minimal difference in air quality between the US and EU. They were initially used to fund public transportation, which I can’t say I disagree with, and it’s not my decision anyway since I’m not the one paying those taxes. The environmental goals claim later, and the jury is out how effective they really are given that one of the key components of climate policy (diesel) caused an entirely different problem and many cities will be banning all but the most recent engines—but meanwhile that was policy for twenty years or so.

No one is doing the US or Europe any favors by trying to directly compare them. Europe is significantly more dense than the US. Most European cities were built and established well before anything other than the wagon and draught animal were even ideas. With a few notable exceptions—New York, DC, Boston, Philadelphia, maybe one can argue Chicago—American cities were built and expanded during and after the industrial revolution. Even more so, just about every Southern and Western City boomed well after the automobile was a standard reality, and as such were built around their use.
 
anrec80
Posts: 2759
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 7:50 am

Re: Should North Americans be limited to one car?

Sun Dec 23, 2018 12:33 am

Dutchy wrote:
I understand that your native Russia will suffer economically because you do not have much more to export, but that doesn't matter. The world can't continue to burn your natural "resources". What is a fair price? Well, we can calculate it, if we want, bit of rhetoric trick to ask for a concrete number, number ten in the propaganda workbook.
But if you want a number, it is said that with € 100/ton companies have a real incentive to move to a sustainable society. So let's start there then.


You somehow drove even this “carbon tax” matter to me and Russia. Are we even discussing Russia on this thread?

In a free market, fair price is what’s agreed between buyer and seller. You mentioned “it’s being said that ...”. Said by whom? And how did they arrive to this “€ 100/ton”? Do those who are supposed to pay this “€ 100/ton” also agree that this price is “fair”? Or is it believed so by those who are trying to “incentivize” them for something? Such as spending their hard-earned capital on things like “green technology”, maybe giving up profitable business opportunities (in favor of some competitors)?
 
anrec80
Posts: 2759
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 7:50 am

Re: Should North Americans be limited to one car?

Sun Dec 23, 2018 12:46 am

Dutchy wrote:
Ah, there we have your little-hidden agenda, playing "it all comes down to the middle classes", divide and conquer right? Furthermore, it is not true, in inner cities you have lot's of public transport, you do need a taxi or your own car. So congestion charges are a perfectly good way to move forward and clean up the air of the cities a bit.


Where do you see “divide-and-conquer” agenda here? All I expressed here was my view of New York City’s taxing approaches, as the City’s resident. Nothing else.

When planning this kind of “surtaxes”, one needs to understand that the best and fastest way to “clean up” is to kill the economy, to persuade people out of the area. Then there will be nothing going on, nobody will need to go anywhere, nothing will need to be moved anywhere, and the air and waters will be pristine clean in no time. I don’t think many people will be exactly thrilled about this kind of “cleanliness” - right?
 
User avatar
WildcatYXU
Posts: 3181
Joined: Sat May 06, 2006 2:05 pm

Re: Should North Americans be limited to one car?

Sun Dec 23, 2018 2:00 am

Pi7472000 wrote:
With climate change rapidly increasing and devstating the Earth should people in North America be limited to one car? Cars are a huge problem and have contributed to climate change. People do not need multiple cars and they burn fuel and even battery powered cars use resources for parts. If someone needs a truck they should have to prove it is necessary for work. When will North Americans curtail their car obssession to help save the Earth?


As a person who was born and raised in a totalitarian country where the government "knew" what's the best for everybody, I have to ask: Just who the heck do you think you are suggesting to regulate what should people own and do?


WIederling wrote:
TWA772LR wrote:
Getting Asia to ban 2 stroke engines would do a whole lot more for global warming than 1 car per person in North America.


Then, China is pressing strongly for electrics in that domain.


Yes. With 5 TWh of electricity generated yearly by burning coal electromobility will definitely help reduce CO2 emissions in China. But then, Santa Claus is definitely coming day after tomorrow on a flying sled pulled by reindeer...
310, 319, 320, 321, 321N, 332, 333, 343, 345, 346, 732, 735, 73G, 738, 744, 752, 762, 763, 77L, 77W, 788, AT4, AT7, BEH, C402, CR2, CRA, CR9, DH1, DH3, DH4, E45, E75, E90, E95, F28, F50, F100, MD82, Saab 340, YAK40
 
AA747123
Posts: 287
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2016 5:15 pm

Re: Should North Americans be limited to one car?

Sun Dec 23, 2018 2:10 am

Pi7472000 wrote:
With climate change rapidly increasing and devstating the Earth should people in North America be limited to one car? Cars are a huge problem and have contributed to climate change. People do not need multiple cars and they burn fuel and even battery powered cars use resources for parts. If someone needs a truck they should have to prove it is necessary for work. When will North Americans curtail their car obssession to help save the Earth?


First, make sure you understand the facts, there is no climate change or global warming. Its all a big lefty hoax. Second we dont need more regulations from the left, hopefully by the end of Trumps second term most if not all unnecessary regs from the left (which is pretty much all of them) will be eliminated.

There should be no regulation on how many cars one could own. I have 4 cars. A 1997 Dodge Ram Diesel (tuned for rolling coal), 1974 BMW 2002, 2015 Mercedes E350, and a 2017 Toyota 4Runner.

I am just one person, and can only drive one at a time so there is no need to regulate me to one car. I drive the Ram, 4Runner and the Benz the most.
Last edited by AA747123 on Sun Dec 23, 2018 2:21 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
salttee
Posts: 3149
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2016 3:26 am

Re: Should North Americans be limited to one car?

Sun Dec 23, 2018 2:18 am

WildcatYXU wrote:
As a person who was born and raised in a totalitarian country where the government "knew" what's the best for everybody, I have to ask: Just who the heck do you think you are suggesting to regulate what should people own and do?

That's a quite reactionary view you're bringing to the forum. I don't know where you come from but I do know that there are people who were born and raised in North America who can and do make nearly identical statements. The "view" you present is almost a cliche.

There is a great difference between a government which manipulates, suppresses and uses the populace for its own ends and a government which is called by its populace (by whatever clumsy means) to dictate standards of behavior and regulate activities that the majority of the people believe is in (or against) their interests.

It is perfectly within the realm of possibility that a community or a nation could decide that an excessive amount of any commodity or behavior is not in the community's interests and choose to regulate or even ban that item.

Please stop crying wolf. If you want to make the case for ownership of multiple cars fine, but don't twist the discussion into something it's not.
 
salttee
Posts: 3149
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2016 3:26 am

Re: Should North Americans be limited to one car?

Sun Dec 23, 2018 2:21 am

AA747123 wrote:
....................

You completely lack awareness of the difference between your opinions and actual reality.

Have a nice day in your very small world.
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 5664
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: Should North Americans be limited to one car?

Sun Dec 23, 2018 2:53 am

€100 per ton equals about €1 per 22 pounds of CO2 produced, which is about €.90 per gallon of gasoline burned. I’m not sure that’s gonna change anyone’s behavior based on EU fuel taxes and their effects. Also, the EU incentivized diesel cars, how’d that work out? Maybe just leaving well enough alone is better.

There is a great difference between a government which manipulates, suppresses and uses the populace for its own ends and a government which is called by its populace (by whatever clumsy means) to dictate standards of behavior and regulate activities that the majority of the people believe is in (or against) their interests.


Sometimes it’s not a very bright line at all. The majority can easily vote to deny the minority their rights. You might look at Democrats who voted away a whole class of the population their rights. It took a War to restore then their rights.

GF
 
User avatar
WildcatYXU
Posts: 3181
Joined: Sat May 06, 2006 2:05 pm

Re: Should North Americans be limited to one car?

Sun Dec 23, 2018 3:44 am

salttee wrote:
That's a quite reactionary view you're bringing to the forum. I don't know where you come from but I do know that there are people who were born and raised in North America who can and do make nearly identical statements. The "view" you present is almost a cliche.


I was born in Czechoslovakia. While we didn't have gulags on our own ground, I had several family members who "visited " them in Siberia. And one who was jailed at home just because it was good for the party. And guess what, we were just normal people, nobody was a fighter against the regime. Enough? BTW, why would be my view reactionary? The government should serve the people, not control them.

salttee wrote:
There is a great difference between a government which manipulates, suppresses and uses the populace for its own ends and a government which is called by its populace (by whatever clumsy means) to dictate standards of behavior and regulate activities that the majority of the people believe is in (or against) their interests.


Hell, no. The line is between the two is very thin and it is being crossed very often nowadays.

salttee wrote:
It is perfectly within the realm of possibility that a community or a nation could decide that an excessive amount of any commodity or behavior is not in the community's interests and choose to regulate or even ban that item.


Yes, it is perfectly possible and it has a name. Totality.

salttee wrote:
Please stop crying wolf. If you want to make the case for ownership of multiple cars fine, but don't twist the discussion into something it's not.


I may be crying wolf, but remember: I have the experience. I may be seeing symptoms people who grew up in North America simply may not recognize.
310, 319, 320, 321, 321N, 332, 333, 343, 345, 346, 732, 735, 73G, 738, 744, 752, 762, 763, 77L, 77W, 788, AT4, AT7, BEH, C402, CR2, CRA, CR9, DH1, DH3, DH4, E45, E75, E90, E95, F28, F50, F100, MD82, Saab 340, YAK40
 
User avatar
Jouhou
Posts: 2539
Joined: Tue May 24, 2016 4:16 am

Re: Should North Americans be limited to one car?

Sun Dec 23, 2018 3:54 am

[twoid][/twoid]
anrec80 wrote:
Jouhou wrote:
Honestly, if cities would build more housing near transit at an affordable cost, many would willingly give up their cars in a heartbeat. I would.


It’s not about cities really. It’s about transit itself, ability to get to workplaces using the transit, etc. Then - developers will build. Plus, an important factor is willingness of families to sacrifice space. Right now, too many family people still believe that a 2 bedroom apartment isn’t enough for them.


We're real cheap-asses here in the US. New rail transit is rare so our best strategy is to build near existing stations. Otherwise we have busses, and once again bus service outside of major cities is sparse and poorly served. Majority of Americans apparently would rather spend tens of thousands of dollars on buying a vehicle, maintaining it and fueling it. Meanwhile there is inadequate transit accessible housing for those of us who would love to ditch our cars.
情報
 
Flighty
Posts: 9963
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 3:07 am

Re: Should North Americans be limited to one car?

Sun Dec 23, 2018 3:56 am

It you want less carbon then there needs to be a global carbon tax versus native ecology (for example, if you deforest an area you need to pay the carbon tax on that).

With the revenues from this tax, other kinds of taxes can and should be reduced.

This isn’t so complicated and there is no need to micromanage people’s lives. I have three cars and shopping for a forth - I drives fewer miles than the average American. Just like to work on them. Get off my case. You probably know less than I do about the issue and making prescriptions about what car people drive is totally silly. Buildings emit more co2 than cars anyway. Cars are a small fraction, but for people who haven’t read anything on this or know anything, they think cars must be a major CO2 issue. Not really true.
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 5664
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: Should North Americans be limited to one car?

Sun Dec 23, 2018 4:06 am

Jouhou wrote:
[twoid][/twoid]
anrec80 wrote:
Jouhou wrote:
Honestly, if cities would build more housing near transit at an affordable cost, many would willingly give up their cars in a heartbeat. I would.


It’s not about cities really. It’s about transit itself, ability to get to workplaces using the transit, etc. Then - developers will build. Plus, an important factor is willingness of families to sacrifice space. Right now, too many family people still believe that a 2 bedroom apartment isn’t enough for them.


We're real cheap-asses here in the US. New rail transit is rare so our best strategy is to build near existing stations. Otherwise we have busses, and once again bus service outside of major cities is sparse and poorly served. Majority of Americans apparently would rather spend tens of thousands of dollars on buying a vehicle, maintaining it and fueling it. Meanwhile there is inadequate transit accessible housing for those of us who would love to ditch our cars.


Cheap? Do you have any idea how much it would cost to build a TGV-style system? California is spending billions on a railway to nowhere. Ridership in every in-City light rail system does not support the system. If you want rail connections, are you willing to pay for it?

Our mass transit is the car.

GF
 
User avatar
Jouhou
Posts: 2539
Joined: Tue May 24, 2016 4:16 am

Re: Should North Americans be limited to one car?

Sun Dec 23, 2018 4:13 am

GalaxyFlyer wrote:
Jouhou wrote:
[twoid][/twoid]
anrec80 wrote:

It’s not about cities really. It’s about transit itself, ability to get to workplaces using the transit, etc. Then - developers will build. Plus, an important factor is willingness of families to sacrifice space. Right now, too many family people still believe that a 2 bedroom apartment isn’t enough for them.


We're real cheap-asses here in the US. New rail transit is rare so our best strategy is to build near existing stations. Otherwise we have busses, and once again bus service outside of major cities is sparse and poorly served. Majority of Americans apparently would rather spend tens of thousands of dollars on buying a vehicle, maintaining it and fueling it. Meanwhile there is inadequate transit accessible housing for those of us who would love to ditch our cars.


Cheap? Do you have any idea how much it would cost to build a TGV-style system? California is spending billions on a railway to nowhere. Ridership in every in-City light rail system does not support the system. If you want rail connections, are you willing to pay for it?

Our mass transit is the car.

GF


I live in the Northeast, our ridership per mile in this region generally tops the rest of the country by a long shot. We struggle to even get short segments of light rail built despite that.
情報
 
anrec80
Posts: 2759
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 7:50 am

Re: Should North Americans be limited to one car?

Sun Dec 23, 2018 4:18 am

WildcatYXU wrote:
As a person who was born and raised in a totalitarian country where the government "knew" what's the best for everybody, I have to ask: Just who the heck do you think you are suggesting to regulate what should people own and do?


Can’t agree more. Each region, each nation must decide by themselves and for themselves how to live their life.
 
anrec80
Posts: 2759
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 7:50 am

Re: Should North Americans be limited to one car?

Sun Dec 23, 2018 4:30 am

Jouhou wrote:
We're real cheap-asses here in the US. New rail transit is rare so our best strategy is to build near existing stations. Otherwise we have busses, and once again bus service outside of major cities is sparse and poorly served. Majority of Americans apparently would rather spend tens of thousands of dollars on buying a vehicle, maintaining it and fueling it. Meanwhile there is inadequate transit accessible housing for those of us who would love to ditch our cars.


Infrastructure here in the USA is ridiculously expensive lately - most projects are even cost-prohibitive. My take on this is - if something is not yet built, it will not be built at all. Just live and make it do with what’s already here. Speaking of transit and car-less living, I’ve seen that in action in cities like San Jose, CA, with all new developments of apartment buildings and light rail. There, Uber and Lyft are big, people use those a lot instead of having a car. They arranged “pick-up spots” for Uber Pools in those areas, and off-peak pools can be really affordable. These things really enabled living in a “suburban-urban” environment without a vehicle. But I guess this can only work in wealthier “yuppier” places like San Jose, CA, some districts in NYC, and NYC-adjacent areas of New Jersey. Not sure how can this fly in mid-range or poorer neighborhoods.

But another thing - transit means greater access to jobs and economic opportunities. And hence, rent/property values in transit-accessible housing goes up immediately. Hence you need to be prepared to shell out for a privilege of not having to have your own car.
 
anrec80
Posts: 2759
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 7:50 am

Re: Should North Americans be limited to one car?

Sun Dec 23, 2018 4:39 am

Jouhou wrote:
I live in the Northeast, our ridership per mile in this region generally tops the rest of the country by a long shot. We struggle to even get short segments of light rail built despite that.


Yes, thanks to 19th - early 20th century railroad companies - guys like Cornelius Vanderbilt, Pennsylvania Railroad, New York Central - their infrastructure built back in those “free market” days is still in use today - tunnels, right-of-ways. Nothing new has been built since. And - this is running out of capacity. Now that New Jersey regions have grown, PATH is handling more passengers it’s ever been designed for. And - digging new tunnels across Hudson River will cost tens of billions. There are talks periodically to extend #7 subway into New Jersey.
 
NIKV69
Posts: 13424
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 4:27 am

Re: Should North Americans be limited to one car?

Sun Dec 23, 2018 4:40 am

Dutchy wrote:
No, America pollutes more per capita and in absolute numbers then the world can afford. So yes, change of behavior is needed. Not just of Americans, but also for Europeans, Chinese and any other nationality, but first of all whom pollutes the most and have polluted the most and there contributed the most to the mess we are in.

So unless you believe that Americans are very special and deserves special treatment, I would say own up to the problem America has heavily contributed to, as need Europeans and others.


Doesn't China produce much more CO emissions than the USA by like a lot? Why are you not critical of them? Why does out freedoms have to be attacked because I may own two vehicles? All this is is more USA hate by another Euro. It gets so old after awhile.
I am the Googlizer!!!
 
anrec80
Posts: 2759
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 7:50 am

Re: Should North Americans be limited to one car?

Sun Dec 23, 2018 4:47 am

GalaxyFlyer wrote:
Cheap? Do you have any idea how much it would cost to build a TGV-style system? California is spending billions on a railway to nowhere. Ridership in every in-City light rail system does not support the system. If you want rail connections, are you willing to pay for it?

Our mass transit is the car.

GF


Depends on a country and even the region. Why China can build tens of thousands of kilometers of high speed lines? Bridges? In New York State, the cost of 3 mile Tapan Zee replacement highway bridge is about $4Bln - more than Russia has spent on their 13 mile Crimean bridge (highway+rail)? Second Ave subway is the project of 2 centuries and its cost is 10 billion, for a mile of tunnel and 3 stations. In Moscow, they build and open such “second ave subways” every quarter. And it’s not about labor cost - take-home pay of a Moscow worker isn’t lagging behind take-home pay of a New York State worker. Same is true with China. Why such incapability? What’s happening with the money here?
 
User avatar
TWA772LR
Posts: 7245
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2011 6:12 am

Re: Should North Americans be limited to one car?

Sun Dec 23, 2018 5:54 am

anrec80 wrote:
GalaxyFlyer wrote:
Cheap? Do you have any idea how much it would cost to build a TGV-style system? California is spending billions on a railway to nowhere. Ridership in every in-City light rail system does not support the system. If you want rail connections, are you willing to pay for it?

Our mass transit is the car.

GF


Depends on a country and even the region. Why China can build tens of thousands of kilometers of high speed lines? Bridges? In New York State, the cost of 3 mile Tapan Zee replacement highway bridge is about $4Bln - more than Russia has spent on their 13 mile Crimean bridge (highway+rail)? Second Ave subway is the project of 2 centuries and its cost is 10 billion, for a mile of tunnel and 3 stations. In Moscow, they build and open such “second ave subways” every quarter. And it’s not about labor cost - take-home pay of a Moscow worker isn’t lagging behind take-home pay of a New York State worker. Same is true with China. Why such incapability? What’s happening with the money here?

Im not trying to bash on China and Russia, but those governments are more authoritarian than governments in the US, its just the way it is. People in the US have it so well that we can afford to, and always do, bitch about everything and we have a say in what the government does. China and Russia can do these projects easily and quickly without the people getting in the way. And the people I'm talking about in the US range from NIMBYs, crooked politicians, environmentalists, etc... Like I said, I'm not bashing China and Russia, it's just 2 different mindsets for the governments, especially governments of BRICS.
When wasn't America great?


The thoughts and opinions shared under this username are mine and are not influenced by my employer.
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 11652
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Should North Americans be limited to one car?

Sun Dec 23, 2018 8:28 am

NIKV69 wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
No, America pollutes more per capita and in absolute numbers then the world can afford. So yes, change of behavior is needed. Not just of Americans, but also for Europeans, Chinese and any other nationality, but first of all whom pollutes the most and have polluted the most and there contributed the most to the mess we are in.

So unless you believe that Americans are very special and deserves special treatment, I would say own up to the problem America has heavily contributed to, as need Europeans and others.


Doesn't China produce much more CO emissions than the USA by like a lot? Why are you not critical of them? Why does out freedoms have to be attacked because I may own two vehicles? All this is is more USA hate by another Euro. It gets so old after awhile.


China pollutes about 2 times as much as the US, in absolute numbers, but there are about 4 times more Chinese. The Chinese government is actively working on the energy transition, the US has a president actively undermining it. The Chinese also produce a lot for the European and American markets, so a big portion of the pollution is for us, for our goods.

Your freedom is limiting freedom of others, and that is not sustainable.

So saying you are part of this world and need to take responsibility for it, like Europeans need to do this and all other inhabitans of the world need to do, is USA hate by another Euro :roll:
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 11652
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Should North Americans be limited to one car?

Sun Dec 23, 2018 8:41 am

TWA772LR wrote:
anrec80 wrote:
GalaxyFlyer wrote:
Cheap? Do you have any idea how much it would cost to build a TGV-style system? California is spending billions on a railway to nowhere. Ridership in every in-City light rail system does not support the system. If you want rail connections, are you willing to pay for it?

Our mass transit is the car.

GF


Depends on a country and even the region. Why China can build tens of thousands of kilometers of high speed lines? Bridges? In New York State, the cost of 3 mile Tapan Zee replacement highway bridge is about $4Bln - more than Russia has spent on their 13 mile Crimean bridge (highway+rail)? Second Ave subway is the project of 2 centuries and its cost is 10 billion, for a mile of tunnel and 3 stations. In Moscow, they build and open such “second ave subways” every quarter. And it’s not about labor cost - take-home pay of a Moscow worker isn’t lagging behind take-home pay of a New York State worker. Same is true with China. Why such incapability? What’s happening with the money here?

Im not trying to bash on China and Russia, but those governments are more authoritarian than governments in the US, its just the way it is. People in the US have it so well that we can afford to, and always do, bitch about everything and we have a say in what the government does. China and Russia can do these projects easily and quickly without the people getting in the way. And the people I'm talking about in the US range from NIMBYs, crooked politicians, environmentalists, etc... Like I said, I'm not bashing China and Russia, it's just 2 different mindsets for the governments, especially governments of BRICS.


You are correct of course, in totalitarian regimes, thinks can move ahead rapidly. Furthermore, safety standards will be lower, thus also the cost and labor cost is quite a factor, no way that a Russian or Chinese construction worker makes as much as someone from New York State. But on the other hand, corruption is less of a factor in America than in Russia. Since accountability is less in a totalitarian regime, the true cost will never be known.
BRICS aren't the same. Brasil and India are pretty much democracies. Russia and China are totalitarian regimes. If you want to include South Africa, it is somewhere in between, because the ANC has been in power since Apartheid was abandoned.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 11652
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Should North Americans be limited to one car?

Sun Dec 23, 2018 8:47 am

Flighty wrote:
It you want less carbon then there needs to be a global carbon tax versus native ecology (for example, if you deforest an area you need to pay the carbon tax on that).

With the revenues from this tax, other kinds of taxes can and should be reduced.


:checkmark:
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 11652
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Should North Americans be limited to one car?

Sun Dec 23, 2018 9:01 am

GalaxyFlyer wrote:
€100 per ton equals about €1 per 22 pounds of CO2 produced, which is about €.90 per gallon of gasoline burned. I’m not sure that’s gonna change anyone’s behavior based on EU fuel taxes and their effects. Also, the EU incentivized diesel cars, how’d that work out? Maybe just leaving well enough alone is better.


It is a figure that is calculated for the industry in the Netherlands to have a real incentive to go sustainable. For cars, Rabobank brought out a report which said the electric car will be compatible with fossil fuel cars in 2025. Till then there should be some kind of tax incentive.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
Ken777
Posts: 10051
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 5:39 am

Re: Should North Americans be limited to one car?

Sun Dec 23, 2018 9:25 pm

"There are roughly 330 million people in the USA and only 270 odd million registered vehicles (which includes work vehicles). "

Tugg, Toddlers through Pre-Teens can't drive. Legally.
 
mham001
Posts: 5745
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 4:52 am

Re: Should North Americans be limited to one car?

Sun Dec 23, 2018 9:53 pm

WIederling wrote:
TWA772LR wrote:
Getting Asia to ban 2 stroke engines would do a whole lot more for global warming than 1 car per person in North America.


Dream on.
Fuel and thus CO2 per kg payload is microscopic in relation to the US situation.
Then, China is pressing strongly for electrics in that domain.
You may still be lamenting the potential loss of your fuel guzzling truck
when they are done with the conversion there.


Well, you could (pssibly) die later from global warming, or you can die sooner from the particulate matter. How is that working out in European cities???

Dutchy wrote:

10mpg (or 1 litter for 4,25km for the rest of the world), is plain ridiculous. People continue to buy these if external cost aren't put into the equation.
.


That is a complete myth. Nobody here can provide us with a single example of a car sold in the US that gets 10 mpg because it doesn't exist (except one European sports car). Even my 15 year old Super Duty Ford truck gets 12 in the mountains. Looking into it, it appears many of the worst offenders are European vehicles. Look for yourself...https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/PowerSe ... owLimit=10
 
User avatar
TWA772LR
Posts: 7245
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2011 6:12 am

Re: Should North Americans be limited to one car?

Sun Dec 23, 2018 9:54 pm

mham001 wrote:
WIederling wrote:
TWA772LR wrote:
Getting Asia to ban 2 stroke engines would do a whole lot more for global warming than 1 car per person in North America.


Dream on.
Fuel and thus CO2 per kg payload is microscopic in relation to the US situation.
Then, China is pressing strongly for electrics in that domain.
You may still be lamenting the potential loss of your fuel guzzling truck
when they are done with the conversion there.


Well, you could (pssibly) die later from global warming, or you can die sooner from the particulate matter. How is that working out in European cities???

Dutchy wrote:

10mpg (or 1 litter for 4,25km for the rest of the world), is plain ridiculous. People continue to buy these if external cost aren't put into the equation.
.


That is a complete myth. Nobody here can provide us with a single example of a car sold in the US that gets 10 mpg because it doesn't exist (except one European sports car). Even my 15 year old Super Duty Ford truck gets 12 in the mountains. Looking into it, it appears many of the worst offenders are European vehicles. Look for yourself...https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/PowerSe ... owLimit=10

Didnt Volkswagen get slapped with a $19 billion fine for violating EPA regulations? ;)
When wasn't America great?


The thoughts and opinions shared under this username are mine and are not influenced by my employer.
 
mham001
Posts: 5745
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 4:52 am

Re: Should North Americans be limited to one car?

Sun Dec 23, 2018 9:58 pm

TWA772LR wrote:
mham001 wrote:
That is a complete myth. Nobody here can provide us with a single example of a car sold in the US that gets 10 mpg because it doesn't exist (except one European sports car). Even my 15 year old Super Duty Ford truck gets 12 in the mountains. Looking into it, it appears many of the worst offenders are European vehicles. Look for yourself...https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/PowerSe ... owLimit=10

Didnt Volkswagen get slapped with a $19 billion fine for violating EPA regulations? ;)


Just goes to show that claiming superiority does not equate to superior behavior.
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 11652
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Should North Americans be limited to one car?

Sun Dec 23, 2018 10:09 pm

mham001 wrote:
Looking into it, it appears many of the worst offenders are European vehicles. Look for yourself...https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/PowerSe ... owLimit=10


Those aren't your average European cars, but top of the line, so not really representative. Cars are significantly cheaper in the US than in generally Europe, there are more bigger engine versions sold in the US.

Cars should do 40MPG or 17km/litter and better. Perfectly achievable.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
TSS
Posts: 3658
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2006 3:52 pm

Re: Should North Americans be limited to one car?

Sun Dec 23, 2018 10:18 pm

Ken777 wrote:
"There are roughly 330 million people in the USA and only 270 odd million registered vehicles (which includes work vehicles). "

Tugg, Toddlers through Pre-Teens can't drive. Legally.

According to posts 57 and 58, there are around 222 million licensed drivers in the US. The number given for registered vehicles in the US includes work vehicles such as delivery trucks, dump trucks, taxis, police vehicles, etc. which are typically owned in large numbers by corporations, not individuals.
Able to kill active threads stone dead with a single post!
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 5664
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: Should North Americans be limited to one car?

Sun Dec 23, 2018 10:27 pm

Dutchy wrote:
mham001 wrote:
Looking into it, it appears many of the worst offenders are European vehicles. Look for yourself...https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/PowerSe ... owLimit=10


Those aren't your average European cars, but top of the line, so not really representative. Cars are significantly cheaper in the US than in generally Europe, there are more bigger engine versions sold in the US.

Cars should do 40MPG or 17km/litter and better. Perfectly achievable.



In the US, the Ford F-series outsells every other vehicle by units; average transaction price is well north of USD 42,000; fuel economy is 24-ish. Cars maybe do better, but nobody buys them.

GF
 
User avatar
Tugger
Posts: 10423
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

Re: Should North Americans be limited to one car?

Sun Dec 23, 2018 11:35 pm

Can't say I understand the idea of abandoning one-third to half the market. Certainly lose me as a customer. Obviously they want me to become a loyal customer of foreign brand vehicles.

Another interesting thing is that the stats are skewed in favor of trucks now because they include SUV and minivan sales as well. This made sense at one time when they were based on trucks/truck chassis. But that is increasingly not the case. Many (most?) SUV's and minivans are based on car-like unibody's and so are really more like cars than trucks. They should be wholly separate at least.

Tugg
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. - W. Shatner
There are many kinds of sentences that we think state facts about the world but that are really just expressions of our attitudes. - F. Ramsey
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 11652
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Should North Americans be limited to one car?

Sun Dec 23, 2018 11:40 pm

Tugger wrote:
Can't say I understand the idea of abandoning one-third to half the market. Certainly lose me as a customer. Obviously they want me to become a loyal customer of foreign brand vehicles.


Don't understand what you are saying here, Tugg. What segment of the market is going to be abandoned and by whom?
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 5664
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: Should North Americans be limited to one car?

Sun Dec 23, 2018 11:47 pm

Ford will be leaving the car business in the US ,save the Mustang, by 2020 or 2021. A lot dealerships are already uninterested in car buyers. There’s no money in cars for the US makers with the Koreans and to a lesser degree the Japanese production.

GF
Last edited by GalaxyFlyer on Sun Dec 23, 2018 11:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 5664
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: Should North Americans be limited to one car?

Sun Dec 23, 2018 11:52 pm

Chrysler only offers the Charger and GM is selling fewer cars than any time in the past.
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 11652
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Should North Americans be limited to one car?

Sun Dec 23, 2018 11:55 pm

Well, blame it on those car manufacturers. There must be a market for cars in America.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 5664
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: Should North Americans be limited to one car?

Mon Dec 24, 2018 12:55 am

There is—Kia, Hyundai, Nissan, Subaru and Honda. But their plants probably cost a lot less to produce than the US manufacturers. New, non-union plants in Indiana, Mississippi, Alabama and Texas. You see loads of the Korean cars. Also, very small margins that US dealers don’t like. An F-150 probably has $8,000 after incentives; Kia maybe $500.

GF
 
geologyrocks
Posts: 173
Joined: Sun Nov 13, 2011 12:05 am

Re: Should North Americans be limited to one car?

Mon Dec 24, 2018 1:51 am

We’ve got countries on the other side of the world with continuous smog alerts but yes, as usual, it’s North America causing the problems.
 
mham001
Posts: 5745
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 4:52 am

Re: Should North Americans be limited to one car?

Mon Dec 24, 2018 1:56 am

Dutchy wrote:
mham001 wrote:
Looking into it, it appears many of the worst offenders are European vehicles. Look for yourself...https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/PowerSe ... owLimit=10


Those aren't your average European cars, but top of the line, so not really representative.


I understand and agree a Lamborghini is not representative of your average European car, however it is more accurately representative than the argument presented about Americans buying 10 mpg cars. They don't because those vehicles don't exist in this market.

GalaxyFlyer wrote:
There is—Kia, Hyundai, Nissan, Subaru and Honda. But their plants probably cost a lot less to produce than the US manufacturers. New, non-union plants in Indiana, Mississippi, Alabama and Texas. You see loads of the Korean cars.


Pretty sure most of those manufacturers car sales are suffering too. Hyundai announced layoffs last week or two. In fact I read the Koreans are considered most at risk because they are more car-oriented and have less CUV/SUVs to offer and no trucks at this time.
 
User avatar
flyingsikh
Posts: 61
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2007 12:47 pm

Re: Should North Americans be limited to one car?

Mon Dec 24, 2018 3:47 am

Why stop at cars? Let’s have the govt regulate how many times a week one person can have steak, or how many phones one person can buy on 5 years.

Or how about mattresses? Perhaps set up a govt inspector who comes into your home and inspects your mattress to deem it wore out, or good for another few years. :rotfl:
Today gives us a chance to love, to work, to play, and to look up at the stars.
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 11652
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Should North Americans be limited to one car?

Mon Dec 24, 2018 7:50 am

geologyrocks wrote:
We’ve got countries on the other side of the world with continuous smog alerts but yes, as usual, it’s North America causing the problems.


Everyone causes the problem, America included.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
WIederling
Posts: 9291
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: Should North Americans be limited to one car?

Mon Dec 24, 2018 10:03 am

Tugger wrote:
They should be wholly separate at least.


Under what emissions scheme are they road legal?
passenger car or small truck?
SUV and such seem to still be covered ( and local producers protected ) by chicken tax.
See why BMW produces their portfolio in the US.
i.e. they have to conform to "small trucks" legal requirements?
Murphy is an optimist
 
WIederling
Posts: 9291
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: Should North Americans be limited to one car?

Mon Dec 24, 2018 10:24 am

Dutchy wrote:
Everyone causes the problem, America included.

But America to a large part causes the Chinese problems too :-)
All the dirty manufacturing externalized and now leaning back with a smirk
and pointy fingers.
Murphy is an optimist
 
User avatar
Tugger
Posts: 10423
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

Re: Should North Americans be limited to one car?

Mon Dec 24, 2018 7:25 pm

WIederling wrote:
Tugger wrote:
They should be wholly separate at least.


Under what emissions scheme are they road legal?
passenger car or small truck?
SUV and such seem to still be covered ( and local producers protected ) by chicken tax.
See why BMW produces their portfolio in the US.
i.e. they have to conform to "small trucks" legal requirements?


To whit:
The Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) Standards set for model years (MY) 2011 through 2016 include small, 2-wheel drive sport utility vehicles (SUVs) with cars instead of light trucks. Until this regulation, all SUVs were categorized as light trucks, along with pickups and vans.

https://www.energy.gov/eere/vehicles/fa ... -or-trucks

Car SUVs had the largest production share increase of any vehicle type in MY 2016, up 1.3 percentage points to a record 12% of all production. Truck SUVs reached a record market share of 29%, resulting in a record 41% market share for combined SUVs in MY 2016. Car SUVs had the largest increase in fuel economy, at 1.1 mpg. Both car SUVs and truck SUVs achieved record high fuel economy and record low CO2 emissions, with car SUVs reaching 26.2 mpg and truck SUVs reaching 22.2 mpg.

https://www.epa.gov/fuel-economy-trends ... Highlight3

And for 2018 an even higher percentage were "car SUV's".

Tugg
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. - W. Shatner
There are many kinds of sentences that we think state facts about the world but that are really just expressions of our attitudes. - F. Ramsey

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 62 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos