[PRCo] Re: Pittsburgh - think tank blasts possible new transit taxes

[Jim Holland]

 > Fred Schneider wrote::
.
 > San Francisco can be a transit city because it measures
 > about 7 miles by 7 miles (47 square miles) and houses
 > about 744,000 people or about 16,000 people
 > per square mile.
.
7X7=49.
.
In spite of the fact that the Population of SF swells several times over 
since many come to SF from surrounding areas to work, SF itself doesn't 
really have traffic problems Relative To Other Cities~!~!~!     Traffic 
is here but flows So Much More Smoothly than most other places.     
Sister in LA-LA-LAnd has often flown to SF for business in rush hour and 
Always Asks Where The Traffic Is~!~!~!     But go to Oakland and I-80  
I~S  backed up Bumper to Bumper by 5.30-AM~!~!~!     Where on earth are 
people going at that hour  --  SF is less than 30-minutes away even in 
traffic~!~!~!     AC and BART have multiple transit lines in E-Bay  (NOT 
the auction house~!~!)  so why so much traffic there.     San Jose is 
3rd largest city in CA  (behind LA and SDiego)  and one can be on a 
freeway in the marshes in bumper to bumper traffic  --  udderly 
amazing~!~!~!     I experience Real Traffic so Infrequently that it is 
ultra annoying when I do  --  and it is usually somewhere outside SF.
.
 > If you live in the suburbs and work in the suburbs and
 > don't go into the city, you will not understand
 > Jim Holland who lives in the city and works in the city.
.
Like Ed, I would prefer to live in the burbs or near the country  --  
but with a 12-15-minute commute To work at 3.30-PM and 8-10-mim commute 
home at 2-AM, why would I move?     While SF would be very expensive to 
live in retirement, I am under rent control  (20-years in this 
location)  and Health Care is Absolutely Fantastic~!~!     Health Care 
needed as we get older and why leave when I have Excellent Health Care 
here?     Flip side is regardless I am going to kick the bucket some 
time so why not live where life is more comfortable.
.
Western Colorado interests me as does southern Washington State near 
Portland.     I was in Portland recently and the traffic was horrific  
--  saw MAX from a distance but didn't take time to ride and haven't 
seen let alone ridden their  *StreetCar*  system.     MAX  system is 
superb - Very High Quality.     The country around the city is 
OverWhelmingly Beautiful and I saw some parts in Southern Washington 
that takes the breath away.     Cost of living more reasonable around 
here.     Met a wonderful woman at an Information Kiosk in a small WA 
town who gave me Really Good Info on the area - quite a crackerjack.     
Although about 40-50-miles dues south of Mt.St.Helens as the crow flies, 
the Columbia river towns weren't affected by the ash fallout - just 
areas west.     But that's no guarantee it won't happen next time.     
Winter Rains can be depressing  --  don't mind rain when I am working 
but that could change in retirement.
.
 > As an aside to defending John and Ed and trying to
 > point out some fundamental difference, Fred is not
 > against the concept of subsidized public transportation..

 > The unfortunate problem is that historically we have given
 > out money ... it is better to allow a lot of useless
 > projects so that all 100 senators and 435
 > representatives in Washington can mail out
 > press releases saying we have given money to
 > your community
.
As I stated in another email, like Josh I misunderstood what John was 
writing but knowing John I Knew it wasn't sinister.     That email I 
sent the other day is possibly  *_One_*  example of what you are talking 
about, and I quote Bob Murphy's response to this Philadelphia Problem here::
.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
--- "Bob Murphy" <isedit at ...> wrote:

The mind boggles. The community has enough clout to get track and 
overhead renewed on a streetcar line that has not run in 15 years but 
not enough clout to get a couple of streetcars sent down the line?

WTF?

There's more here than meets the eye (or the mind of the slack 
assedjournalist who wrote the piece).

RT Murphy
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
.
In the military we Always Made Sure we spent the budget allotted to us 
in fear of losing it if we didn't so money was spent on Many Senseless 
Items.     Besides, completely spending the money meant we could ask for 
more in the next budget period so we would have More To Spend On 
Senseless Items~!~!~!
.
.
.
-- 
*Jim Holland*

Studying *Pittsburgh Railways Company*

....................From 1930 -- 1950

*Pennsylvania Trolley Museum (PTM)*

http://www.pa-trolley.org/

*N.M.R.A.*

http://www.nmra.org/