Mr. Suzuki, it's evolution not revolution

Comment pieces are not news!

Suzuki's politically adept enough to realize that moving the goalposts farther away from his opponent's position can result in a different type of victory altogether.

+1.

And the comment is just one big ad hominem.

Seriously, why isn't car pooling a valid way to reduce congestion? If 3 out of 4 cars were deleted from rush hour, wouldn't we have to find another name for it? Why aren't zero emission cars another way to reduce emissions? Why is car culture sacred (and I'm a big gear head)?

Car culture is not part of the every day commute, that only requires utility transport. The big block muscle-car can still be enjoyed on the weekend. Regardless of which side of the global warming debate you are on, stand on a downtown street corner in any big city, and try to breathe normally for 20 minutes. Then tell me a reduction in pollution wouldn't be a good thing.

I agree with the end bit of Caleb's post most of all.

Even if we do not pay attention to the global warming aspect (which I usually avoid on here because it's such a charged topic), there are numerable other reasons why a reduction of cars on the road is a good thing, from longevity of present road conditions through cleaner cities, a reduction of the heat island effect (which has been lethal in major cities), combating the ongoing health problems caused by polluted air, and so on. It tends to be good financially (at least, it has for me since I avoid driving) and it's a benefit for city infrastructure.

Working on ways which reduce dependence on vehicles, improve public transit or curtail the deleterious effect of our dependence on having more cars than we need are all good directions for us to take, and it doesn't have to be a climate change issue at all. There are a lot of environmental problems which we can work to remedy for reasons other than a belief in AGW.

I strongly encourage car pooling. Reducing congestion and freeing up precious fuel is in my best interests.


...Wide open streets and plenty of gas...

In big cities, it certainly makes sense to get people out of cars. You've got the economies of scale that make transit viable, and all the numbnuts trying to drive their SUV's downtown just plugs up the roads. Vancouver is moving in that direction, but not fast enough. We need to spend more money on transit, so it becomes convenient and comfortable to take, and restrict cars more. Probably by charging them to enter the downtown core the way London does. We get flooded every day by people who don't live in Vancouver, don't pay taxes, but plug up our streets cause they work here.

In Podunkville, transit makes no sense. Let em drive their yahoo trucks, but pass stricter gas efficiency laws, to make those trucks more fuel efficient. They don't really need all that power from big V8s, (mostly), they just think they do to make them more manly. Even in small towns, half the guys driving the full size pickups never use all that hauling capacity, it's just for status.

This entire paragraph nullified anything you said previously. You don't have a clue about rural living, go back to your schwinn and tofu.

This entire paragraph nullified anything you said previously. You don't have a clue about rural living, go back to your schwinn and tofu.


Yup, I live in rural Ontario, my truck has a V8, the power it delivers is used regularly. I feel really manly as well.

4 wheel drive is also a must, especially in winter.

This entire paragraph nullified anything you said previously. You don't have a clue about rural living, go back to your schwinn and tofu.


Yup, I live in rural Ontario, my truck has a V8, the power it delivers is used regularly. I feel really manly as well.

4 wheel drive is also a must, especially in winter.

When you need to go and get a dozen sheets of plywood, 10 4X4s, 40 2X4s, and 10 bags of Sacrete, you mean you don't pull it behind your Kuwahara?

It was actually 50 2x6s, 10 2x8s, 4 8x8s after I got 2 loader scoops of gravel.

Then there's my 28' boat and the cut tree's I need to haul to the wood splitter.

The Smarty Pants car was a little under powered.

It was actually 50 2x6s, 10 2x8s, 4 8x8s after I got 2 loader scoops of gravel.

Then there's my 28' boat and the cut tree's I need to haul to the wood splitter.

The Smarty Pants car was a little under powered.
You probably just forgot to put the ground effects and the giant spoiler on it, that makes a difference.

I think was Suzuki is also talking about is a rethinking of suburbia and urban sprawl, which is a major problem in North America. We build these sprawling subdivisions full of cul-de-sacs way out on the periphery of urban centres that can't be served by transit and people have to drive their car 15 minutes to the mega-mall just to pick up a carton of milk, let alone commute to their job. There are few sidewalks because there's nothing within walking distance. Even if you happen to live in a subdivision that's "across the street" from the mega mall, you're facing 5 minutes to get from your front door to that street, 5 minutes to get to the nearest intersection where you can cross, 5 minutes waiting for the traffic light to change so you can make a mad dash across an 8-lane expressway, 5 to backtrack on the other side and 5 minutes to cross the 40 acre parking lot. So people there basically drive any time they have to leave their house for any little thing.

This entire paragraph nullified anything you said previously. You don't have a clue about rural living, go back to your schwinn and tofu.


Schwinn? You really know how to hurt a guy.

Did I say rural living or did I say small towns? If you're a farmer, sure you need that pickup and hauling capacity. If you're living in a small town where a transit system isn't efficient, many people don't need a pickup, and in fact don't drive one. My point was that vehicles can be made more fuel efficient than they are now. Somehow people in other countries manage their rural living with smaller more fuel efficient vehicles. But we have lots of guys in America who's manhood seems to be all wrapped up in driving the "big rig," that rarely sees any serious hauling.

And if you disagree with that part, how does it invalidate what I said about transit in big cities? You mean you're against the idea there too?