by CarlosFerreira » Tue 26 Aug 2008, 18:34:49
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mos6507', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('cube', 'J')ust sit back, relax, let the price of fuel go wildly expensive and the "free-market" will organize the rest.
What positive things do you think the free market is going to do for us?
I'm wondering if it could bring the trains back into scope?
Nobody likes a monopoly, and inconvenience isn't something we've been brought up to tolerate in past generations. I know I haven't. When I pick the train and the subway to work, my friends laugh at me. But I save money, because our local train system is definitely cheaper than driving. So, a couple of familiar faces have been popping up every so often at the train station. Old laughers came around with a tree-hugger speech which I can't get enough of, since I love a good laugh in the morning.
A bit of consumer behaviour: people who ride the train at the end of the month and resort to using their car from day 1 to day 20 are just strapped for money. You get a lot of these in Portugal, these days. Around here, real-estate is more valued for being close to public transportation (especially rail, like train or subway) than by having 2 parking spaces
up until a certain social-economic level, after which a couple of parking places are more highly valued. The people which can weather the price storm keep on driving, the rest will grumpily take the public transportation.
Movement is necessary; economic efficiency requires usage of energy. The most efficient ways of spending (expensive) energy will survive, the rest will either perish or serve niches - rich people. That's the fun in the free market - it will select the most efficient alternatives.
Of course, the free market is a rudimentary mechanism, even if it works well enough. The problem is that it can only react. Sometimes, you need to act beforehand; an investment in the most efficient ways of moving people and stuff around, before PO, would require planing. I propose we look into not only energy efficiency, but the ultimate cost of producing an energy unit in a format that can be used by that vehicle. PO does not mean there won't be oil; it means oil derivatives will be expensive. So, even in the case that a train uses more BTUs to haul a certain number of people and cargo, the fact that a BTU in the form of electricity can be produced cheaply than a BTU in diesel/biodiesel form can turn the train into a more efficient system, can't it?
Finally, to ThreadBearsUncle: the decline isn't any near. As mos says,
the suburbs are fighting back$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'P')laces like Moreno Valley retain two enormous advantages over traditional cities. They have lots of cheap, available land and a pool of workers keen to avoid the ever-lengthening commute to Los Angeles and Orange County. When it comes to attracting businesses, these two factors outweigh high petrol prices. The city of Ontario, which contains the Inland Empire’s main airport, already has more than two jobs for each home. Greg Devereaux, the city’s manager, reckons it will eventually have more than three.
Bill Batey, Moreno Valley’s mayor, is frank about the city’s present problems. When asked about its future, though, he brightens. Pointing to a large aerial photograph on the wall, he outlines plans for a new warehouse, a cluster of medical offices and a lot more houses. There is plenty of empty space in the photograph; indeed, there is a huge expanse of bare earth directly across the street from city hall. The frontier is not closed yet.
Please note that, despite the "fight back" part I chose to quote, the rest of the text is gloomier. And note the discussion about returning to the cities and even increasing usage of the "skeletal train network"