Topic Actions

Topic Search

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

EXTRY! EXTRY! IMPEACHMENT IMMINENT!

The Management is not responsible for the contents of this forum. Enter at your own risk.
Re: EXTRY! EXTRY! IMPEACHMENT IMMINENT!
Post by Daryl   » Thu Jun 22, 2017 6:52 am

Daryl
Admiral

Posts: 2205
Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2010 1:57 am
Location: Queensland Australia

On holidays have spent some time in London.
Using an Oyster card it was just so easy and cheap to get around on the tube (Underground)
Rarely waited more than five minute between trains, you just looked at the free map and "We'll take the Piccadilly line to XXX, then catch the ZZZ line to YYY".
Where I live in Australia there is a single bus twice a day from two kilometers away.

Imaginos1892 wrote:
Fireflair wrote:The reason employers don't cover car insurance or the like is equally simple, it's not needed by the majority of people. Most people want and need medical coverage to reduce their expenses over time. Young people need coverage less than older people, generally, but the idea is to balance that need out by spreading the insurance costs over a wide range of age, sex and other factors. How car insurance, to use your example, isn't needed. I can get anywhere I need to go by public transportation, if I wanted. I choose to have a car.

There are few places in the U.S. where public transit doesn't suck diseased donkey cock. I was without a vehicle for almost two weeks once. I could drive to work in 35-40 minutes. Taking the bus, a train and another train took well over three hours. Each way. Especially since I could see the train I had to catch leave the station just before the one I was on got there. EVERY. FUCKING. TIME. Obviously the scheduling was done by the government.

In fact, if you don't own a vehicle, you're at a big disadvantage looking for a job. Most employers do not consider public transportation a reliable way to get to work.
Top
Re: EXTRY! EXTRY! IMPEACHMENT IMMINENT!
Post by Annachie   » Thu Jun 22, 2017 8:29 am

Annachie
Vice Admiral

Posts: 1603
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2011 7:36 pm

2 busses a week.
Butfuck nowhere.


Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You are so going to die. :p ~~~~ runsforcelery
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
still not dead. :)
Top
Re: EXTRY! EXTRY! IMPEACHMENT IMMINENT!
Post by dscott8   » Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:35 am

dscott8
Captain of the List

Posts: 646
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2010 6:17 am

Unless you live in a major city (New York, DC, San Francisco, etc.) public transport in the US is fairly useless. Even in the large cities, it's not as safe, clean or convenient as in other countries. Why? It hasn't gotten the major attention because it doesn't fit the American lifestyle. The move to suburban living (esp. after WW II) made personal automobiles almost mandatory, and our rural expanses are so large that the train networks seen in places like Europe are impractical for personal use (they do work well for freight). It's a matter of scale.
Top
Re: EXTRY! EXTRY! IMPEACHMENT IMMINENT!
Post by Fireflair   » Fri Jun 23, 2017 12:49 am

Fireflair
Captain of the List

Posts: 401
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2012 6:23 pm

I will readily grant you that public transportation in the US is poorly laid out, executed and generally a shambles. But most cities are working to improve it. It's a part of the infrastructure that needs a lot of attention in this country. But it is used extensively in almost every city, not just the great metropolises like New York City.

Public transit is big in most cities because of the expense of having a car. One American in ten relies on public transportation. That means that 10% of the US population isn't burning gas, creating congestion on the streets or spending their money on a car. Urban sprawl after the war definitely made having a car a part of the lifestyle most want to live. However, given the high density population within a city, it's hardly a requirement.

84% of households in the US have a car. So 16% are managing without one. About 60% of the population of the US lives in a city which has public transportation.

You most definitely can get around without a car. I work about 12 miles south of Cincinnati, OH. We have a great many people from Cincinnati who work here. These are not wealthy people, these are inner city sorts who have to ride the bus each way. Some of them, from discussions I've had with them, do indeed have to take an hour and a half or two hour trip to and from work each day. That's a real bitch, I agree. But it still can be done.

We don't, and can't, rely on the sort of commuter rail system which is common in Europe. Our population distribution doesn't make a good sprawling rail system economically feasible. But most cities have light rail, busses and so forth which are workable.

If you live outside a city and consider a car a requirement for life, then you need to evaluate where you're living, how you spend your money and where you work. Living within your means might mean you have to live in a suburb instead of the country, or maybe a more urban environment than the one you do live in. Maybe you should find a smaller place with closer access to public transportation. There's always going to be a trade off. Cost of where you live, transit times, safety, schooling, etc.
Top
Re: EXTRY! EXTRY! IMPEACHMENT IMMINENT!
Post by Annachie   » Fri Jun 23, 2017 8:00 am

Annachie
Vice Admiral

Posts: 1603
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2011 7:36 pm

Must admit, PT was pretty good when we lived in Melbourne.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You are so going to die. :p ~~~~ runsforcelery
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
still not dead. :)
Top
Re: EXTRY! EXTRY! IMPEACHMENT IMMINENT!
Post by dscott8   » Fri Jun 23, 2017 9:40 am

dscott8
Captain of the List

Posts: 646
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2010 6:17 am

Fireflair wrote:If you live outside a city and consider a car a requirement for life, then you need to evaluate where you're living, how you spend your money and where you work. Living within your means might mean you have to live in a suburb instead of the country, or maybe a more urban environment than the one you do live in. Maybe you should find a smaller place with closer access to public transportation. There's always going to be a trade off. Cost of where you live, transit times, safety, schooling, etc.


How many people are willing to uproot their entire life for this?
Top
Re: EXTRY! EXTRY! IMPEACHMENT IMMINENT!
Post by Fireflair   » Sun Jun 25, 2017 3:49 am

Fireflair
Captain of the List

Posts: 401
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2012 6:23 pm

Granted, dscott, not many would. But people are willing to move because of job reasons all the time. I relocated twice after I retired from the Navy, and it wasn't cheap since neither company paid for the relocation of my family and all our junk.

However, if you cannot support your current standard of living you have to do something. Either cut your expenses or increase your income. If you can't find a better job where you are, you typically find one elsewhere. If you can't find a better job then you cut the expenses and a vehicle might be one of the expenses which has to go. You'll spend a lot more of your time waiting for and traveling on public transportation but you'll save car payment, gas and insurance money each month.

For me, that's nearly 600 a month, I have a motorcycle, two cars and a truck on my insurance. For others it's probably less and many others probably a lot more. I recently divorced but choose to live in the same school district as my ex, so the kids don't have to change schools, etc. That choice effects everything I do and plan in my life. Once the kids are grown and out of school, I'll relocate again. Either to find a job I want/like better than the current one or to live where I want.

I've said this before and it always seems to apply to financial situations (unless you're the government of course), but the goes in must equal or exceed the goes out. Live with in your means.
Top
Re: EXTRY! EXTRY! IMPEACHMENT IMMINENT!
Post by cthia   » Mon Jul 03, 2017 10:51 am

cthia
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 8151
Joined: Thu Jan 23, 2014 1:10 pm


Son, your mother says I have to hang you. Personally I don't think this is a capital offense. But if I don't hang you, she's gonna hang me and frankly, I'm not the one in trouble. —cthia's father. Incident in ? Axiom of Common Sense
Top
Re: EXTRY! EXTRY! IMPEACHMENT IMMINENT!
Post by Annachie   » Mon Jul 03, 2017 11:25 pm

Annachie
Vice Admiral

Posts: 1603
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2011 7:36 pm

Rumour is Gov. Christie is going to be the new head of the National Parks Service. :)

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You are so going to die. :p ~~~~ runsforcelery
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
still not dead. :)
Top
Re: EXTRY! EXTRY! IMPEACHMENT IMMINENT!
Post by biochem   » Tue Jul 04, 2017 9:38 am

biochem
Rear Admiral

Posts: 1220
Joined: Thu Aug 19, 2010 8:06 pm
Location: USA



Sorry just because leftists want him impeached doesn't mean it's going to happen.

They'd be better off focusing on finding a presidential candidate that could pick off some of those swing voters

1. Pick someone from flyover country (the purple part or rust belt) NOT from the coasts
2. Pick someone from outside the Washington swamp. Usually governors are good but the democratic bench has been so decimated that you may need to look more broadly than that
3. Social moderate, the leftists have been pushing so hard they are offending the middle and costing you swing votes
4. Economy credentials, the swing voters are economic agnostics. They don't care if it is trickle down, democratic socialism or what as long as it works. They're tired of the elites spouting economic theories, they want real life results.
Last edited by biochem on Tue Jul 04, 2017 4:19 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Top

Return to Politics