Subject:
|
Re: Public transportation (was Re: Age limitations)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 6 Jul 2000 05:05:52 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
338 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Erik Olson writes:
> Hi non-debating Dave,
"non-debating"?! You must have me confused with someone else--I nitpick
**everything**! 8^)
> Earlier, I'd seen the eerie flames burning on the tracks out in the yard.
> Then, down below, express trains rushed in from both directions! Above
> me, an airplane roared low! The light from the headlamp grew brighter, and
> brighter! I was three stories up, standing on a shaking pile of steel girders
> and concrete, yes! Yes! An earthquake must be like this!
Oh, I don't deny that the vehicles of mass transit are often very cool--I
myself love to watch trainyards at work, and I'm not even a train junkie!
There's something, I don't know... primal (and not in any weird way) about all
that raw power at work. The sheer tonnage involved is staggering!
> Anyway, mass transportation works best not for errands, but for going to the
> same place every day and carrying little. Except for this nice bus line I've
> got that makes the rounds of the Toys R Us stores...
You're lucky you've got a nice bus route; my TRU inconveniently located
relative to the T, up a muddy hill and across maniacal Pittburgh traffic.
There's also no denying that the arena of mass transit is exactly that--mass.
For carting tons of people to and from work, a subway is much more efficient
use of space than 100 automobiles, but a subway doesn't generally compare in
terms of day-to-day usage.
Dave!
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
12 Messages in This Thread:
 
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
