Bike lanes - there is SUCH a resistance to bike lanes in Washington State, I've noticed. Seattle, a little less so. But I recall everyone freaking out over a proposed bike lane down a main road in my home town a few years ago. I'll bet that, twenty years from now, they'll all be using it a lot more.
I think a lot of Americans view public transport in Europe through rose tinted glasses. It isn't universally accessible and useful, in some areas it is cheaper to drive than use the public transport.
Many European cities have barely any provisions for cyclists.
That being said I absolutely agree with the premise of this article, if you want things to improve you are going to have to do something yourself, whether that is campaigning for better transport links or moving.
I currently live in Vancouver BC and the public transport here is better than in any of the British cities I have previously lived in. There is also an excellent system of cycle routes.
There is still room for improvement obviously but there seems to be an active group of cyclists campaigning for extensions to the cycle network and the council does seem to respond to this.
Two things. First, I'm confused by your post because you state first that "Drug company profits have to come way down to reasonable levels and that will help hugely." Then later you say "It really comes down to wanting to do this fairly, or wanting to let some groups with huge hands and strong arms (private companies like pharmaceutical corps) grab it all first and then sell it back to us for mega-profits." Aren't drug companies and pharmaceutical corps the same ones? So are their profits reasonable at this point in time or not?
Could you also direct me to where you get this info?
My second thing is that I'm very interesting in this topic and would love to research it further, including other countries' systems. Could you tell me to which countries you're referring? And if you have any links to where you get your info, I'd love to check them out.
First off, let me state that I am thoroughly enjoying this debate/conversation and, as someone (maybe Andrea?) stated earlier, am learning a lot. I particularly appreciate the Canadian perspective. It had been months since I’d been to Wisebread, but I’m so glad I stumbled back. Thank you, Philip! And now to what I missed last night when my computer crashed at home…
@Canada girl:
“As you argue, people may be careless with resources they don't take ownership for, but you're forgetting that people are MORE careful with resources that are limited.”
Excellent point here, and one I had not considered. I’m not sure it makes the case for socialized health care given the lack of resources, but people would value those resources more if they were less plentiful.
“In addition, I think people who pay more for something have an inflated sense of what they are entitled to. The whole "I worked hard for it, therefore I deserve" it attitude is part of what got the US into its current financial crisis in the first place.”
Here, I have to disagree with you, not about the mentality, which I agree is rampant in the US, but about the cause. My best friend is a Legal Aid attorney, whose clients do not pay for their services, and let me tell you, it ain't the paying for it that makes people feel entitled. Her clients are often extremely demanding and resentful of any efforts they must personally make to further their own case, despite the fact that they're receiving a free service (and one with many other clients). I’d actually argue that it is entitlement programs (social security, welfare, etc.) that give people that mentality. Although perhaps we’re both off the mark and it’s a simple matter of plentitude or scarcity of supply. Nothing would humble you like waiting 9 months for a dr.'s appointment.
@Xin Lu:
I agree with you wrt the need for price transparency, but not with the government mandates. As a culture, IMO, we need to look less to the government for our solutions and more to ourselves. Transparency would also be made available if demanded by enough people. Perhaps a not-for-profit advocacy group is in order.
You do make a good point re: monopolies, but socialized health care is exactly that, a monopoly. I guess I should have said government-run programs rather than just government intervention.
@Edgar A.:
“The statement by somebody that "the majority of voters do not pay income tax" seems unlikely. It's probably true that somewhere between 30% and 40% of the potentially tax-paying residents of the U.S. pay zero income tax. But these are mostly poor and young, two categories that are among the least likely to vote. So, without documentation, we should regard the statement as right-wing hyperbole (to put it as gently as possible).”
I absolutely agree that documentation would be needed to support this statement (obviously a moot point now as Velja has backed up her previous statement), however, Velja expressed a mind-set that is not unique to her. Is the correct response an immediate write-off as “right-wing hyperbole”? Or would that be as bad as refusing to listen to a “flaming liberal”?
Perhaps the right response to a statement we initially find overly dramatic or even morally repugnant, is to consider the statement and look for the grain of truth within it, or at a minimum the circumstances and beliefs that have created the mentality, then consider it before we discard it. Believe me, I understand how difficult this is; it’s something I am working on personally. However, I really believe that that’s where we’d have to get to truly get out of “partisan politics”.
I can totally relate to your revelation! I drive a 4 cylinder Nissan truck, and while it isn't a gas guzzler, it's not exactly frugal. But slowing down to 60 mph, and taking it easy in town, has definitely saved me 20% fuel - and that's $10 a fill up. At two fill ups a month, that's $240 a year, which is very appealing to my wallet (hey, that equates to nearly 5 tanks of gas)!
There are lots of folks on the freeway who are now part of the `Parade of Frugality', and I am often in the middle of a pack of 60 mile per hour'ers. The scenery, the company, the music, the book on tape, can all make slowing down more enjoyable, and definitely less stressful!
Life is a journey, not a destination. Enjoy the ride.
Kelja, The costs of medicare that appear to make it unsustainable are political problems. It's the same with social security. Drug company profits have to come way down to reasonable levels and that will help hugely. We have a certain amount of health care pie to divide up. It really comes down to wanting to do this fairly, or wanting to let some groups with huge hands and strong arms (private companies like pharmaceutical corps) grab it all first and then sell it back to us for mega-profits. Other counties spend much less and provide care to everyone, with better overall results.
Thank you for focusing on choice - something most people don't think about. We don't realize that everything in our life is a choice and with every choice comes consequences. I like very much how you outlined some of the consequences for the choice of moving or staying put.
When more people start making conscious choices instead of living in blind comfort then we'll start making progress on creating a sustainable word.
Philip, sometimes it's like you read my mind. I've had these issues on my brain for a while now, but I'm actually finding it more likely that I will be moving away from the city, rather than towards it, simply because I want to be able to grow my own food during the summer months. I'm concerned about how to get around in an efficient manner, and trying to map out smart routes to work that I can take on a scooter (sometimes, I don't feel like navigating the freeway on my motorcycle).
On my way to work today, I was thinking about the possible expansion of our rail system. Rail is an amazingly efficient way to travel, but remains expensive because so few people use it. But as airfares start to skyrocket, it might make more sense to travel on a train. We're going to need a much more expansive system, though.
I enjoyed overtime, and its pay, when I was younger, and poorer. Now that I am older, and more financially stable, I would much rather have the time. Still, there are times when I find it necessary to work overtime in order to get things done. I have no problem with it as the exception verses the rule.
They don't have to be super thin, but you don't want them uber thick either. Disks . . . sort of . . . not quite a full quarter inch think. Perhaps a tad thinner than that. Good luck. And I'm telling my mother about the pudding pop thing. She uses those individual servings quite a bit at her job. She and my father are a therapeutic foster couple for a special needs agency. So they are always packing lunches for the clients. The pudding pop idea would be a great little after day program treat.
This discussion is certainly lively and interesting. I think it's sad that there was probably more discussion in this forum about health insurance and whether it's a "right" or a privelege for the wealthy only, then there has been in Congress since Hillary Clinton was first lady. The reason is that the people who set the laws do not have to live with the same constraints as the average US worker.
I propose that all elected officials should be given the same level of medical coverage as the average Walmart employee rather then their exisiting rather generous medical coverage. That might start some discussion about whether the system needs to be "fixed". And, this wasn't a slam at Walmart, you could probably substitute the name for any large employer in the US.
I used to drive a lot like you did. I relished the feeling of "winning," as if the city's streets were a racetrack. I changed my thinking so I can still get that feeling while saving gas, driving more safely, and being polite. Every time someone zooms past me as I coast to a red light (for example), I think smugly to myself, "It cost that guy ten cents just to pass me."
I had my car crushed by the scarapyard the other day, then I came across this forum, grabbed a lighter some foil and a can of air and hey presto spanking. Thanks for the info.
I put them in with milk and peanut butter and whirl them around in the blender.
Your way sounds awesome, too. If you want to cut calories, slice them into little rounds and freeze them into "chips". They taste just like ice cream, as you're probably already aware.
You're right that the FDIC uses a reserve collected from the member banks to pay for failed institutions. That's the theory anyway. Fact is that reserve is negative right now and since the FDIC expects banks to fail at a historic rate the next two years, the reserve has no chance to recover.
I think we're on the cusp of a systemic financial failure.
Bear Sterns, by the way, wasn't covered by the FDIC, but still was 'rescued' by the FED. Many of the big financial institutions and regional banks are teetering on collapse. The only thing holding the mess together is the FED which is trading treasuries for their worthless mortgage paper. This supposedly is a short-term LOAN but as it will get rolled out indefinitely, it's the FED giving it away.
There's always a consequence for any action (Newton?). This will end up inflating the currency beyond belief. I easily see a better than 10% inflation rate within the next 12 months - using government skewed numbers.
Yea, should have amended my statement to say approximately 32% don't pay income tax. Or, perhaps this would be more to your liking - 50% pay very, very little income tax. This, by the way Edgar, isn't hyperbole, right-wing or otherwise. I wish you'd keep your obvious prejudices to yourself since you have no idea of my philosophical leanings.
Since you seem (I could be wrong here) to be a believer in big government, answer the question I posed here earlier.
Name one government program that is both efficient and effective? Hard one, eh?
It's really common sense, someone who has 'skin' in the game, is much more interested in the outcome than someone who does't. Human Nature. The people who get entitlements from government and pay nothing in, vote to increase entitlements with little regard what it does to the taxpayer. Why is this hard to understand?
I'm a believer that individuals can rise up challenges no matter what. Big Government, in my opinion, stands in the way of creative, smart and motivated people.
The fact that your family is happy somewhere is a good reason to stay there. The idea that it's too expensive to move, though, I think is a bad one.
First, because I think in the medium term it's going to get too expensive to stay--fuel costs will eat people alive in the outer suburbs (and not too much after that, in the inner suburbs as well).
Second, because I think it's as cheap to move as it's ever going to be again.
As more and more people choose to move to places that are wel-served by mass transit, property values and rents in those areas will go up. And as communities that lack mass transit raise taxes so that they can provide it, property values in those areas will go down. (Rents will probably go down too, but I don't think that will turn the areas into cheap places to live; it'll just bankrupt a lot of property management companies.)
If you're determined to stay, I suggest you become politically active: Work to bring in mass transit. Work to change zoning laws to bring jobs and shopping closer to where people live. The sooner these things happen, the less your community will suffer.
yes, our friend's children used to use these to commute to work in lima. i imagine that here this would be considered a gypsy taxi and i'm sure there are licensing laws about these things. seems like there's always a regulation prohibiting small, practical ideas, doesn't it? :P
Like a previous Guest poster, I live near a town of 200,000 with a meager bus system (maybe it's even the same town!). I don't see the bus system expanding any time in the near future. We are in the Southwest where land is cheap, therefore the population is very spread-out. Homes tend to be sprawling ranch-style homes on large lots, and apartment complexes are made up of 8 or 10 3-story buildings surrounded by ample parking and lawn area. There likely aren't enough people per square mile to support the costs of mass transit. So I have to disagree with the article writer's optimism of bus system expansion, at least in this part of the U.S.
Bike lanes - there is SUCH a resistance to bike lanes in Washington State, I've noticed. Seattle, a little less so. But I recall everyone freaking out over a proposed bike lane down a main road in my home town a few years ago. I'll bet that, twenty years from now, they'll all be using it a lot more.
Alas, none of the believers that government should play more of a role in healthcare will answer my simple question:
Name one government program (agency) that is both effective and efficient?
I shake my head in disbelief at the people who think big government is smart and will save us all.
I, for one, would rather live free.
I think a lot of Americans view public transport in Europe through rose tinted glasses. It isn't universally accessible and useful, in some areas it is cheaper to drive than use the public transport.
Many European cities have barely any provisions for cyclists.
That being said I absolutely agree with the premise of this article, if you want things to improve you are going to have to do something yourself, whether that is campaigning for better transport links or moving.
I currently live in Vancouver BC and the public transport here is better than in any of the British cities I have previously lived in. There is also an excellent system of cycle routes.
There is still room for improvement obviously but there seems to be an active group of cyclists campaigning for extensions to the cycle network and the council does seem to respond to this.
Any suggestions on good popsicle molds? I bought some of the Target dollar spot ones, and they're pretty bad.
John:
Two things. First, I'm confused by your post because you state first that "Drug company profits have to come way down to reasonable levels and that will help hugely." Then later you say "It really comes down to wanting to do this fairly, or wanting to let some groups with huge hands and strong arms (private companies like pharmaceutical corps) grab it all first and then sell it back to us for mega-profits." Aren't drug companies and pharmaceutical corps the same ones? So are their profits reasonable at this point in time or not?
Could you also direct me to where you get this info?
My second thing is that I'm very interesting in this topic and would love to research it further, including other countries' systems. Could you tell me to which countries you're referring? And if you have any links to where you get your info, I'd love to check them out.
Thanks in advance,
Joanna
First off, let me state that I am thoroughly enjoying this debate/conversation and, as someone (maybe Andrea?) stated earlier, am learning a lot. I particularly appreciate the Canadian perspective. It had been months since I’d been to Wisebread, but I’m so glad I stumbled back. Thank you, Philip! And now to what I missed last night when my computer crashed at home…
@Canada girl:
“As you argue, people may be careless with resources they don't take ownership for, but you're forgetting that people are MORE careful with resources that are limited.”
Excellent point here, and one I had not considered. I’m not sure it makes the case for socialized health care given the lack of resources, but people would value those resources more if they were less plentiful.
“In addition, I think people who pay more for something have an inflated sense of what they are entitled to. The whole "I worked hard for it, therefore I deserve" it attitude is part of what got the US into its current financial crisis in the first place.”
Here, I have to disagree with you, not about the mentality, which I agree is rampant in the US, but about the cause. My best friend is a Legal Aid attorney, whose clients do not pay for their services, and let me tell you, it ain't the paying for it that makes people feel entitled. Her clients are often extremely demanding and resentful of any efforts they must personally make to further their own case, despite the fact that they're receiving a free service (and one with many other clients). I’d actually argue that it is entitlement programs (social security, welfare, etc.) that give people that mentality. Although perhaps we’re both off the mark and it’s a simple matter of plentitude or scarcity of supply. Nothing would humble you like waiting 9 months for a dr.'s appointment.
@Xin Lu:
I agree with you wrt the need for price transparency, but not with the government mandates. As a culture, IMO, we need to look less to the government for our solutions and more to ourselves. Transparency would also be made available if demanded by enough people. Perhaps a not-for-profit advocacy group is in order.
You do make a good point re: monopolies, but socialized health care is exactly that, a monopoly. I guess I should have said government-run programs rather than just government intervention.
@Edgar A.:
“The statement by somebody that "the majority of voters do not pay income tax" seems unlikely. It's probably true that somewhere between 30% and 40% of the potentially tax-paying residents of the U.S. pay zero income tax. But these are mostly poor and young, two categories that are among the least likely to vote. So, without documentation, we should regard the statement as right-wing hyperbole (to put it as gently as possible).”
I absolutely agree that documentation would be needed to support this statement (obviously a moot point now as Velja has backed up her previous statement), however, Velja expressed a mind-set that is not unique to her. Is the correct response an immediate write-off as “right-wing hyperbole”? Or would that be as bad as refusing to listen to a “flaming liberal”?
Perhaps the right response to a statement we initially find overly dramatic or even morally repugnant, is to consider the statement and look for the grain of truth within it, or at a minimum the circumstances and beliefs that have created the mentality, then consider it before we discard it. Believe me, I understand how difficult this is; it’s something I am working on personally. However, I really believe that that’s where we’d have to get to truly get out of “partisan politics”.
Just my two cents,
Jo
I can totally relate to your revelation! I drive a 4 cylinder Nissan truck, and while it isn't a gas guzzler, it's not exactly frugal. But slowing down to 60 mph, and taking it easy in town, has definitely saved me 20% fuel - and that's $10 a fill up. At two fill ups a month, that's $240 a year, which is very appealing to my wallet (hey, that equates to nearly 5 tanks of gas)!
There are lots of folks on the freeway who are now part of the `Parade of Frugality', and I am often in the middle of a pack of 60 mile per hour'ers. The scenery, the company, the music, the book on tape, can all make slowing down more enjoyable, and definitely less stressful!
Life is a journey, not a destination. Enjoy the ride.
Kelja, The costs of medicare that appear to make it unsustainable are political problems. It's the same with social security. Drug company profits have to come way down to reasonable levels and that will help hugely. We have a certain amount of health care pie to divide up. It really comes down to wanting to do this fairly, or wanting to let some groups with huge hands and strong arms (private companies like pharmaceutical corps) grab it all first and then sell it back to us for mega-profits. Other counties spend much less and provide care to everyone, with better overall results.
Philip:
Thank you for focusing on choice - something most people don't think about. We don't realize that everything in our life is a choice and with every choice comes consequences. I like very much how you outlined some of the consequences for the choice of moving or staying put.
When more people start making conscious choices instead of living in blind comfort then we'll start making progress on creating a sustainable word.
Cheers,
Alex
Philip, sometimes it's like you read my mind. I've had these issues on my brain for a while now, but I'm actually finding it more likely that I will be moving away from the city, rather than towards it, simply because I want to be able to grow my own food during the summer months. I'm concerned about how to get around in an efficient manner, and trying to map out smart routes to work that I can take on a scooter (sometimes, I don't feel like navigating the freeway on my motorcycle).
On my way to work today, I was thinking about the possible expansion of our rail system. Rail is an amazingly efficient way to travel, but remains expensive because so few people use it. But as airfares start to skyrocket, it might make more sense to travel on a train. We're going to need a much more expansive system, though.
I enjoyed overtime, and its pay, when I was younger, and poorer. Now that I am older, and more financially stable, I would much rather have the time. Still, there are times when I find it necessary to work overtime in order to get things done. I have no problem with it as the exception verses the rule.
They don't have to be super thin, but you don't want them uber thick either. Disks . . . sort of . . . not quite a full quarter inch think. Perhaps a tad thinner than that. Good luck. And I'm telling my mother about the pudding pop thing. She uses those individual servings quite a bit at her job. She and my father are a therapeutic foster couple for a special needs agency. So they are always packing lunches for the clients. The pudding pop idea would be a great little after day program treat.
This discussion is certainly lively and interesting. I think it's sad that there was probably more discussion in this forum about health insurance and whether it's a "right" or a privelege for the wealthy only, then there has been in Congress since Hillary Clinton was first lady. The reason is that the people who set the laws do not have to live with the same constraints as the average US worker.
I propose that all elected officials should be given the same level of medical coverage as the average Walmart employee rather then their exisiting rather generous medical coverage. That might start some discussion about whether the system needs to be "fixed". And, this wasn't a slam at Walmart, you could probably substitute the name for any large employer in the US.
I used to drive a lot like you did. I relished the feeling of "winning," as if the city's streets were a racetrack. I changed my thinking so I can still get that feeling while saving gas, driving more safely, and being polite. Every time someone zooms past me as I coast to a red light (for example), I think smugly to myself, "It cost that guy ten cents just to pass me."
Now THAT is a good idea :) Thanks, Myscha!
I had my car crushed by the scarapyard the other day, then I came across this forum, grabbed a lighter some foil and a can of air and hey presto spanking. Thanks for the info.
I put them in with milk and peanut butter and whirl them around in the blender.
Your way sounds awesome, too. If you want to cut calories, slice them into little rounds and freeze them into "chips". They taste just like ice cream, as you're probably already aware.
LOVE the pudding pop hack!
You're right that the FDIC uses a reserve collected from the member banks to pay for failed institutions. That's the theory anyway. Fact is that reserve is negative right now and since the FDIC expects banks to fail at a historic rate the next two years, the reserve has no chance to recover.
I think we're on the cusp of a systemic financial failure.
Bear Sterns, by the way, wasn't covered by the FDIC, but still was 'rescued' by the FED. Many of the big financial institutions and regional banks are teetering on collapse. The only thing holding the mess together is the FED which is trading treasuries for their worthless mortgage paper. This supposedly is a short-term LOAN but as it will get rolled out indefinitely, it's the FED giving it away.
There's always a consequence for any action (Newton?). This will end up inflating the currency beyond belief. I easily see a better than 10% inflation rate within the next 12 months - using government skewed numbers.
That's gonna hurt!
@Edgar A
Yea, should have amended my statement to say approximately 32% don't pay income tax. Or, perhaps this would be more to your liking - 50% pay very, very little income tax. This, by the way Edgar, isn't hyperbole, right-wing or otherwise. I wish you'd keep your obvious prejudices to yourself since you have no idea of my philosophical leanings.
See: http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/542.html
Since you seem (I could be wrong here) to be a believer in big government, answer the question I posed here earlier.
Name one government program that is both efficient and effective? Hard one, eh?
It's really common sense, someone who has 'skin' in the game, is much more interested in the outcome than someone who does't. Human Nature. The people who get entitlements from government and pay nothing in, vote to increase entitlements with little regard what it does to the taxpayer. Why is this hard to understand?
I'm a believer that individuals can rise up challenges no matter what. Big Government, in my opinion, stands in the way of creative, smart and motivated people.
The fact that your family is happy somewhere is a good reason to stay there. The idea that it's too expensive to move, though, I think is a bad one.
First, because I think in the medium term it's going to get too expensive to stay--fuel costs will eat people alive in the outer suburbs (and not too much after that, in the inner suburbs as well).
Second, because I think it's as cheap to move as it's ever going to be again.
As more and more people choose to move to places that are wel-served by mass transit, property values and rents in those areas will go up. And as communities that lack mass transit raise taxes so that they can provide it, property values in those areas will go down. (Rents will probably go down too, but I don't think that will turn the areas into cheap places to live; it'll just bankrupt a lot of property management companies.)
If you're determined to stay, I suggest you become politically active: Work to bring in mass transit. Work to change zoning laws to bring jobs and shopping closer to where people live. The sooner these things happen, the less your community will suffer.
sell what for sex?
/
I like your post but dont understand and I want to understand.
Please delve further.
-s
yes, our friend's children used to use these to commute to work in lima. i imagine that here this would be considered a gypsy taxi and i'm sure there are licensing laws about these things. seems like there's always a regulation prohibiting small, practical ideas, doesn't it? :P
Like a previous Guest poster, I live near a town of 200,000 with a meager bus system (maybe it's even the same town!). I don't see the bus system expanding any time in the near future. We are in the Southwest where land is cheap, therefore the population is very spread-out. Homes tend to be sprawling ranch-style homes on large lots, and apartment complexes are made up of 8 or 10 3-story buildings surrounded by ample parking and lawn area. There likely aren't enough people per square mile to support the costs of mass transit. So I have to disagree with the article writer's optimism of bus system expansion, at least in this part of the U.S.
How long can you keep moonshine?