Bend, Oregon Gets Its Comeuppance

[Admin]

What I got from the times article was that the real problem was that they spent money they never had building a new line and getting new trains. The debt seems to be MTA's biggest budget issue, not fuel cost. Even if mass transit is affected I do think that high energy cost will disproportionately affect people dependent on their cars.

No, the NY Times article was used to illustrate rate hikes into the foreseeable future. You conveniently avoided the Christian Science Monitor article, which directly tied rate hikes to fuel cost increases.

 

[rfarren]

No, the NY Times article was used to illustrate rate hikes into the foreseeable future. You conveniently avoided the Christian Science Monitor article, which directly tied rate hikes to fuel cost increases.

The CS article was about the entire mass trans of the US. Most places are more affected than New York's, as their main mode of mass transit it bus. The hikes in the future for MTA is based on their mounting debt due to previous projects and current projects: the q train. It was in the article.

Again, people who are forced to use cars will be disproportionately affected by high energy cost. It's not that hard to figure out. It's really basic stuff. If NYC uses less energy per capita than any other city, we should therefore, be less affected by the cost of high energy.

From wikipedia:
"Gasoline consumption in the city is at the rate the national average was in the 1920s,[1] and greenhouse gas emissions are a fraction of the national average, at 7.1 metric tons per person per year, below San Francisco, at 11.2 metric tons, and the national average, at 24.5 metric tons.[2] New York City accounts for only 1% of United States emissions while housing 2.7% of its population."

 

[Marc_C]

Oh boy, walk out for a while and there is a bunch of replies. I started replying to this a few hours ago...

Midway gets negatively compared to an urban area.

I simply told you my preference after you commenting negatively on that Brownstone.

Midway gets negatively compared to a mythical place somewhere in Switzerland.

Geez, you sounds like Dan Quayle after the got slamed by Bentsen at that VP debate. You're the one that made the comparison between the Midday and Switzerland.

Midway gets negatively compared to the suburbs.

I didn't. Suburbs are generally a waste of land and resources.

High density living is preferable.
Suburban sprawl is bad and horrible.

See my point above.

Suburban living is high density.

Never said anything close to that. If the whole planet would prefer that mode of living, we would run out of space.

Urban living is high density, but the good kind.

Less waste in space and resources.

I guess Midway is hell on earth.

Never said that, I just mentioned I prefered way more the #1 option. Lucky Luke would probably choose Midday type density/setting - I prefer Urban-central cities setting.

All those statements were to point out the constantly shifting frame of reference that rfarren (mostly, you a little) was applying to the argument, rendering most of his points, and some of yours, moot.

Somehow you and Patrick are experts on Midway from 2500 miles away and based on a single long distance aerial view and a couple of Google street images, yet whine and complain when the same is done for NYC and Park Slop.

Okay, now how many years did you spend learning and reading about Urban issues, Aerial photographic, etc? Pretty easy to see from that view that the land use in similar to many rural communities in North America. It's not rocket science.

"...the land use in [sic] similar to many rural communities ...", Yet that photo of a rural community 40 miles from the nearest urban area was used as ammunition to decry urban/suburban sprawl. Rfarren also used it to bring up the pointless and specious comparison to a mythical town in Switzerland.

 

[Admin]

The CS article was about the entire mass trans of the US. Most places are more affected than New York's, as their main mode of mass transit it bus. The hikes in the future for MTA is based on their mounting debt due to previous projects and current projects: the q train. It was in the article.

If you want to believe your own little fairy tale that rising energy costs won't increase costs on mass transit, NYC or elsewhere, there's no hope for you at all. Enjoy the polka-dotted sky in your world. I give up.

 

[rfarren]

If you want to believe your own little fairy tale that rising energy costs won't increase costs on mass transit, NYC or elsewhere, there's no hope for you at all. Enjoy the polka-dotted sky in your world. I give up.

My point is that NYC is in a situation to weather high energy prices better than any other place in the country. Even if they raised monthly fares to $110, gas at $5 dollars a gallon would cost well more for the average American driving 1000 miles a month.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

 

[Admin]

Even if they raised monthly fares to $110, gas at $5 dollars a gallon would cost well more for the average American driving 1000 miles a month.

Well, duh! :roll: Do you really think that anyone is going to argue that driving your own vehicle is cheaper than taking public transportation? Anywhere?

Your argument was that mass transit fares would not rise due to higher energy prices, which -- as I've shown -- is a ridiculously untenable position.

My point is that NYC is in a situation to weather high energy prices better than any other place in the country.

Yeah, yeah...NYC is special. I've heard that one before. :roll:

 

[rfarren]

You conveniently avoided the Christian Science Monitor article, which directly tied rate hikes to fuel cost increases.

Your cs article said this about New York's budgetary shortfalls:

Take New York City.

Transit officials here are in the midst of the biggest subway expansion in several generations. For instance, they're finally building the Second Avenue line that has been planned for decades.

Still, with a 5 percent increase in ridership during the past year, the overall system that was built at the turn of the century is jammed.

"So what we're trying to do is modernize the signaling system that goes back to the Depression area," says Jeremy Sossin, a spokesman for the Metropolitan Transportation Authority. "That will allow us to increase the frequency of trains and move more through during the peak rush hours."

Whereas the article then continues to say about fuel cost:

For much of the rest of the country, buses are the primary form of public transportation. They're also the type of transport getting hit hardest by the high fuel prices. In a recent APTA survey, transit officials reported that the diesel prices they pay have jumped from $1.25 a gallon in 2004 to $3.32 today.

The article did not

directly [tie] rate hikes to fuel cost increases.

Again, my understanding is that MTA's budget falls are do to projects, maintenence, debt, and loss of real estate value and corporate revenues. The problem with the MTA is not the cost of fuel. The only problem the MTA has with the cost of fuel is: the parts of this country that are sprawled out aggravate recessions when fuel cost are high.

We are moving into a world where energy will be more expensive. Sprawling metropolitan areas, which are incredibly inefficient, will struggle in that environment. They will have an affect on the economy in places that aren't so wasteful.

 

[rfarren]

Your argument was that mass transit fares would not rise due to higher energy prices, which -- as I've shown -- is a ridiculously untenable position.

I never said that. I said, that MTA budgetary short falls are not a direct cause of high fuel cost. I used your articles which more or less said the same thing.

 

[rfarren]

Rfarren also used it to bring up the pointless and specious comparison to a mythical town in Switzerland.

Did I say this?:

It even has a quaint downtown loaded with charm and Swiss character. There's an annual celebration called Swiss days...

I didn't compare Midway to some mythical swiss town, you did...

 

[Admin]

 

[Marc_C]

Rfarren also used it to bring up the pointless and specious comparison to a mythical town in Switzerland.

Did I say this?:

It even has a quaint downtown loaded with charm and Swiss character. There's an annual celebration called Swiss days...

I didn't compare Midway to some mythical swiss town, you did...

Wrong again, Sparky. You were the first to make a direct comparison to a mythical Swiss town with:

I believe Patrick's point was that the town above uses way more land than is needed for 4000 people. In switzerland a town of that size would use a quarter of the land used by midway.

Somehow you equated a passing mention of Swiss character in some of the buildings (because the majority of settlers there were Swiss and you have your panties in a wad over this "charm" thing) with the idea that Midway is a duplicate of a Swiss village - something I never remotely suggested. Then to further dig the hole you found yourself in, without knowing a thing about Midway, you grab a Google street view of what you think is "downtown" to try to make your incorrect point. But since everyone in NYC is an expert on everything....

 

[Marc_C]

<troll feeding warning>

But I have all this extra chum I didn't use......

 

[rfarren]

Wrong again, Sparky. You were the first to make a direct comparison to a mythical Swiss town with:

I believe Patrick's point was that the town above uses way more land than is needed for 4000 people. In switzerland a town of that size would use a quarter of the land used by midway.

Somehow you equated a passing mention of Swiss character in some of the buildings (because the majority of settlers there were Swiss and you have your panties in a wad over this "charm" thing) with the idea that Midway is a duplicate of a Swiss village - something I never remotely suggested. Then to further dig the hole you found yourself in, without knowing a thing about Midway, you grab a Google street view of what you think is "downtown" to try to make your incorrect point. But since everyone in NYC is an expert on everything....

Whatever dude... Patrick said in regards to that photo of midway:

I'm serious here, but I actually dislike the second. Talking about wasted land and urban sprawl.

You said it wasn't sprawled, to which I responded:

I believe Patrick's point was that the town above uses way more land than is needed for 4000 people. In switzerland a town of that size would use a quarter of the land used by midway.

I was not comparing it to a mythical town, but rather trying to interpret what patrick said. You then responded:

There's nothing even remotely urban about it. It even has a quaint downtown loaded with charm and Swiss character.

Excuse me if I interpreted your comment as: "what are you talking about, this is just like a swiss town."

But since everyone in NYC is an expert on everything....

And since a guy named Marc in sandy is ignorant...
What's the point of a comment like that. I'm from NYC, am I not allowed an opinion?

Anyhow...I'm over this, and think you guys are too.... when a crotchety old man in Utah starts calling a youngin like me Sparky, you realize that this has descended into name calling, and nothing of any value can be added.

 

[EMSC]

DEBATE is OFFICIALLY over =; =; . Turns out that I live in the best place in the US =D>

(Well OK, I'm actually a whole 1mi from it :roll: ).

http://money.cnn.com/magazines/moneymag/bplive/2009/index.html

http://money.cnn.com/video/pf/2009/07/09/pf_best_places_louisville.moneymag/


:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :stir:

And now back to your 9 pages of regularly scheduled :snowball fight: :sabre fight:

 

[Marc_C]

DEBATE is OFFICIALLY over =; =; . Turns out that I live in the best place in the US =D>

(Well OK, I'm actually a whole 1mi from it :roll: ).

As I've said before - the best place to live is where you're happiest.

[Acknowledgment to the late Alex Lowe for the basis of this meme, who once said: "The best climber is the one having the most fun." I suspect it applies to skiing as well.]

 

[jamesdeluxe]

DEBATE is OFFICIALLY over . Turns out that I live in the best place in the US (Well OK, I'm actually a whole 1mi from it ).

I haven't been there in 23 years, but that made me laugh: LOUISVILLE! We used to goof on it as Colorado's version of Hooterville.

That video was pretty funny, no doubt produced by the chamber of commerce. I can deal with it for very short periods of time, but with the exception of New Mexico, it always creeps me out how "ski country" out west usually means communities with +/- 100% caucasians.

 

[Geoff]

DEBATE is OFFICIALLY over . Turns out that I live in the best place in the US (Well OK, I'm actually a whole 1mi from it ).

I haven't been there in 23 years, but that made me laugh: LOUISVILLE! We used to goof on it as Colorado's version of Hooterville.

That video was pretty funny, no doubt produced by the chamber of commerce. I can deal with it for very short periods of time, but with the exception of New Mexico, it always creeps me out how "ski country" out west usually means communities with +/- 100% caucasians.

I've spent a stupidly huge amount of time in Louisville, Colorado over the last decade. I've done a ton of work at CableLabs. There are some nice slices of Boulder but Louisville is pretty much the definition of heinous uncontrolled suburban sprawl. 90% of the structures in town can't be more than 15 or 20 years old. It's as soulless a place as I can imagine and comparable to equally soul-free places like the burbs around Raleigh-Durham, HotLanta, Dallas, ...

 

[EMSC]

I've spent a stupidly huge amount of time in Louisville, Colorado over the last decade. I've done a ton of work at CableLabs. There are some nice slices of Boulder but Louisville is pretty much the definition of heinous uncontrolled suburban sprawl. 90% of the structures in town can't be more than 15 or 20 years old. It's as soulless a place as I can imagine and comparable to equally soul-free places like the burbs around Raleigh-Durham, HotLanta, Dallas, ...

Well, Cablelabs is smack in the middle of the sprawling big-box national-chain heaven portion of Louisville. Right near $600K+ over-sized boxy new houses with 10 foot offsets :lol:

The Old Town section of Louisville is actually nice, but very, very small. Of course a fair amount of locals call it loser-ville though too. Just as bad around here are wandering 'city' borderlines where one city will approve big retail right next to another 'city' boundary and it comes across as being part of the second city since there is nothing else nearby in the first city's boundary area. One example is all the big box crap just on the South side of the 36 on Mccaslin blvd... Feels like part of Louisville but its technically not - it's all a part of the 'city' of 'Superior' (superior-ly overpriced housing and bad developers that is).

But It's apparently the Best ever suburb sprawl in the nation! Just ask Money Mag :lol:

 

[Geoff]

But It's apparently the Best ever suburb sprawl in the nation! Just ask Money Mag :lol:

Money Mag also had Nausea, New Hampshire as their top place to live for a number of years. I've always been baffled by their criteria. They certainly don't align with mine.

 

[jamesdeluxe]

My brother (who's lived in Denver for 26 years) just got back from a business trip to Les Schwab tires in Bend, and wrote me an e-mail this morning. Based on Schubwa's TRs, I told him that he should've skied at Bachelor, which appears to be having a great year and has a ton of intermediate terrain that he'd like. Here was his response:

I had a beautiful view of snow-covered Mt. Bachelor and the Three Sisters peaks. That area is getting killed by the recession. 16% unemployment. They hate the Californians that have brought their money and ways to the area. Most of the locals think it's ruined them

I laughed and sent him a link to this thread and the "biased liberal elite" NY Times article that we were discussing last summer... well, before Admin started hissing about the East.

And just so Schubwa doesn't think I'm taking shots at Bend; it's only about the economy (and Californians :lol.