[PLUG] OT: PGP Sigs in Spam

Jeme A Brelin jeme at brelin.net
Fri Oct 17 01:19:02 UTC 2003


On Thu, 16 Oct 2003, Michael C. Robinson wrote:
> How many people from Beaverton en route to Vancouver have to go through
> downtown Portland?
[snip]
> Even just a two lane road from 30 and Cornelius Pass across Sauvie's
> Island to Vancouver involving the construction of two bridges, one of
> which has to be built anyways to replace a failing one, would alleviate
> a lot of traffic congestion.

More roads to not alleviate congestion.  This is one of those times where
most folks' common sense is absolutely contradictory to the real world
(sort of like the common sense notion that things must touch in order to
have mechanical effect on each other which was shattered by Newton).

The good people of Atlanta, Los Angeles, Seattle, and Detroit can tell you
all about how much their congestion was relieved by new road construction.

> Doing a two lane road limits the number of cars going through there
> which alleviates pollution concerns some.  Especially if we start using
> cleaner cars which we should be doing anyways.

Fuel efficiency and emissions are red herrings.  The real problem is the
automobile itself.  They do not operate on a human scale and as a result
destroy the basic mechanisms of human civilization.  They keep people
apart spatially and (partially as a result of the spatial separation)
psychologically.  Their scale of operation (high speed and huge size)
removes the practical need for closely constructed, fully functioning
neighborhoods.  (Why should we have a grocery store here when there's a
megamart five miles down the road?)  This creates an expectation of
convenience and a sense of entitlement to that which is not practically
available.  The constant travelling also decreases the number of
opportunities for chance encounters with other human beings and virtually
eliminates familiarity with one's neighbors and the need to get along well
with those whom one would not normally seek out as companions.

I could go on.  This only brushes the surface.

> There's a lot of beautification going on, but where's the parking and
> how much is being done to establish needed facilities?

In my opinion, there's far too much parking downtown.  There's probably
more parking downtown than actual ground acreage.

> Highway 30 is at four lanes, 3000 cars or so a day pass Scappoose.
> Perhaps it would have been better to add mass transit instead of doing
> the road expansion project or better to extend Cornelius Pass to
> Vancouver for all the folks going around.

Mass transit would have been a great idea, but the people of Columbia
County have been totally unreceptive to the idea of building a rail
system.

> The top part of the circle around Portland, the road from Cornelius Pass
> to Vancouver, is missing.

Why would you want people to go AROUND the city?  To continue the illusion
that they live in the country?

> Columbia County is the poorest in the state probably due largely to
> having zero higher education institutions and also due to poor access to
> Vancouver, which is quite frankly closer than Portland as the crow
> flies.

The crow is not a human being.  Geography is more than just distance on a
map.  There's a big fucking river there.  Respect that.  It's not just
some obstacle for you overcome and subdue.

> Scappoose has enough density, not to mention the wealthiest Fred Meyer's
> in the state thanks to the traffic on 30, mass transit is becoming a
> realistic idea.

The Fred Meyer is probably part of the reason it's such a poor county.
Fred Meyer can only exist because people drive there to do all their
shopping in one place.  We know what this does to small, local businesses
that could be filling those niches.

Here's another case where efficiency is totally destructive.  An
"inefficient" system with dozens of shops (one in each neighborhood) would
employ more people and, being owner-operated, keep the profits in the
county.

I don't know whether to laugh or cry when someone says that a Fred Meyer
or a Wal-Mart or Target or something is coming into town and calls it
"investment in the community" and says that's a good thing.  Nothing could
be worse for a community than to have a new shop built that is owned by
someone outside the area.  The argument comes that the new establishment
will employ local people and that's good for the local economy.  However,
the fact is that it is very much a financial INVESTMENT and a good
investment is one from which you draw more than you put in.  The intent of
the remote owners is to suck more money out of the community than they
put into it.

> It's a better idea than those stupid streetcars put down the center of
> clogged arteries for the benefit of the rich living in new riverfront
> condos just south of downtown Portland.

Well, streetcars down the center of clogged arteries ARE a good idea.

However, the new South Waterfront (as they're now calling John's Landing,
I guess) is the worst idea EVER.  It will be nothing buy high priced
housing and fancy new office space for upscale business.  The public
transit is necessary only to get the poor people in for working in the
shops to serve the rich people.  And there is enough geographic separation
between that and the real downtown area to keep the homeless people from
accidentally wandering in.  And if they try to ride the streetcar, well,
that's why we have transit cops.

> Mass transit systems either need to be up off the streets or under them,
> but for gosh sakes not on them.

They need to REPLACE private transportation on the same routes.

The streets should be for people operating at a human scale (pedestrians,
cyclists, scooters or the like for the elderly and otherwise infirm) and
the occassional commercial or emergency vehicle.  Anybody travelling
beyond that scale in speed or size should be on a rail.

> They also need to be fast enough to matter without too many stops.  The
> streetcars are cars that need a special light guage rail, how stupid.

And WHY is that stupid?  It's cheaper to maintain, provides a smoother
ride, runs with greater mechanical efficiency, and is less prone to
accidental collision than a vehicle on a paved road with pneumatic tires.

> Get out more Jeme, be more realistic.

I get out a whole lot.  And I see more of the city than you can get from
behind your TV-like windshield.

I think you're shooting from the hip and working from your internal
notions of what things SHOULD be like without having any experience what
how these things really work.  Building more roads has NEVER decreased
congestion.  Adding lanes actually DECREASES average speeds due to
turbulence effects from cars changing lanes to jockey for position.
Auto emissions are nothing compared to the enormous emissions of
refineries, tire plants, and road run-off from leaky machines plus the
ridiculous waste of junkyards, tire dumps, drive-thru disposables, etc.
etc. etc...  It's a nightmare stream of endless garbage and poison with
exactly one very short generation of usefulness.

Grow up and get responsible.  We've got lots of work to do to shape this
place up for our great-great-grandchildren and their
great-great-grandchildren.

As the Iriquois law stated (as recorded by Thomas Jefferson, a great
admirer of the Iriquois):  Make every decision with respect for its impact
on the seventh generation, even if this requires skin as thick as the bark
of a pine.

In other words, butch up, pussy... it's not your world to trash.  So get
out there and work harder for the people that really matter:  those who
will not be born for two hundred years.

J.
-- 
   -----------------
     Jeme A Brelin
    jeme at brelin.net
   -----------------
 [cc] counter-copyright
 http://www.openlaw.org




More information about the PLUG mailing list