State of the Union address, 2007

NY Times transcript of the State of the Union address.

Economy: Bush says we need to reduce government spending, and elimnate the sneaky ways in which Congressmen slip special interest earmarks into spending bills. I'm in favor of this.

Education: Bush talks about "giving local leaders flexibility." Great, shut down the Department of Education thus giving local leaders complete flexibility. Unfortunately, Bush just wants to expand the federal governments role in education. Bush says "we must increase funds for students who struggle" but there is no mention of student who are above average but are being shortchanged by the school system because all the focus is only on the "struggling" students.

* * *

Health Care

This is the best part of Bush's speech:

I propose a standard tax deduction for health insurance that will be like the standard tax deduction for dependents. Families with health insurance will pay no income or payroll taxes on $15,000 of their income. Single Americans with health insurance will pay no income or payroll taxes on $7,500 of their income.

It's about time that there is finally a proposal to separate health insurance from the employer. Under the current system, the individual who wants to purchase his own insurance is doubly screwed. In the first place, there's no tax break for individually purchased insurance. And in the second place, there isn't even any insurance marketed to individuals because the entire focus is on selling comprehensive insurance plans to businesses.

Because the Bush plan gives a fixed deduction, it encourages people to shop for lower priced insurance rather than take the most expensive plan on account of the fact that government is paying for part of the additional cost.

This is the best idea to ever come out of W's mouth.

* * *

Immigration: Bush says let more people come here to work. Let them become citizens. Bush doesn't care about preserving our nation the way it is. Big thumbs down to Bush.

Energy: Clean coal technology is good and nuclear energy is even better. Unfortunately that is lost because most of Bush's energy focus is on alternative fuels, and government mandates to force companies to make the stuff. If alternative fuels were in any way practical, the high gas taxes in Europe would have encouraged the adoption of such technologies over there. Instead, Europeans have reacted to high gasoline costs by driving small cars.

Judicial nominations: Bush complains that Congress isn't doing its job in confirming his judicial nominees, and he is right. Shame on Congress.

Terrorism, Iraq, foreign policy: I'm not going to comment on this stuff at this time.

Comments

[The Engineer]

>>Instead, Europeans have reacted to high gasoline costs by driving small cars.

Actually, besides small cars, they have reacted by buying diesels instead of gasoline powered cars. In some countries, diesels account for 50% of all cars sold. Diesels make up less than 1% of US passenger car sales.

Unfortunately, refiners can't just make any amount of diesel. If they make more diesel, they have to make more gasoline as well. As a result, there is a gasoline glut in Europe, and a diesel fuel scarcity.

Believe it or not, the oil companies send barges full of gasoline over from Europe to New Jersey, and send the barges back to Europe full of diesel. This makes gasoline cheaper in the US, and diesel more expensive.

In the grand scheme of things, are these high European gas taxes really saving energy? It takes energy to move those barges. It takes more energy to make a diesel car than a gasoline one. It takes energy to upgrade a refinery to make more diesel and less gasoline. What's the cost/ benefit analysis?

And what does this tell us about ethanol? Where is the cost/ benefit analysis for that fuel? Granted, getting an engine to run on ethanol is not a great cots, but what are the other costs?

[David Alexander]

Actually, besides small cars, they have reacted by buying diesels instead of gasoline powered cars. In some countries, diesels account for 50% of all cars sold. Diesels make up less than 1% of US passenger car sales.

It depends on the country. In countries like France, nearly half of the cars of the roads use diesel fuel while in Italy, diesel cars are supposedly rare. Plus, in many European countries, larger engine sizes are taxed more heavily, so you'll see plenty of cars that would six-cylinder engines that are spec'd with four cylinder motors and in some cases, turbos.

I'd actually kill to import some of the European mid-size cars here in the States. I'm tired of the choices being boring Japanese sedan and cheaped-out American sedan while the non-luxury European car market in the US is basically VW's Mexican rejects.

[Frank N Stein]

Could someone more statistically inclined analyze the State of the Union speech and figure out the percentage of talking points which actually fall under the executive branch's power, according to the Constitution?

I know, I know, we are well past having a limited and constrained federal government. But I think it would still be interesting to see the numbers.

[The Engineer]

DA, I drove a BMW 530d on the Autobahn last year. It was a decently powerful car. It topped out at about 125 mph, which is pretty good for a diesel. The only guys passing me were M3s and S4s.

You can't import this car because it doesn't meet US emissions regulations. European diesels are pretty dirty, relative to gas engines, which for all intents and purposes emit nothing more than CO2 and water vapor.

The European coutnries with the highest diesel penetration tax cars based on their C02 emissions, and they also give diesel fuel a tax break relative to gasoline. In countries like the UK, where diesel fuel and gasoline are taxed the same, diesels don't sell as well.

[David Alexander]

Bush says "we must increase funds for students who struggle" but there is no mention of student who are above average but are being shortchanged by the school system because all the focus is only on the "struggling" students.

Students who struggle is shorthand for "poor black, Hispanic, and non-Northeast Asian" students. Their failure to do as well as their white and Northeast Asian counterparts is a nagging problem among liberals.

Mind you left or right, we are all liberals now.

Too bad he didn't mention nuclear power. If the French can do it, so can we. When the lefty environmentalists complain that nuclear power is bad for children and other living things, the response could be that the wholesome French do it so it must be OK. This arguement would work on the Kerry Democrats too. This country has plenty of nuclear material to be mined for our energy use, not to mention coal. The US is like the Middle East of coal (there has been a coal fire burning in NE Pennsylvania for years). We should also drill for oil off our continental shelves. There is plenty there. A nice side effect of having the US energy independent is all the good jobs that would be created in the process. Mining, refining, nuclear power, construction, etc...
By the way Engineer, the BMW diesel is a great car and I think Audi makes one as well. If I could get my hands on one, I would buy it in an instant. I had a diesel VW Dasher for years and I loved it. Only problem is that it had no AC, but I could keep that thing running with a screwdriver and pliers.

[David Alexander]

DA, I drove a BMW 530d on the Autobahn last year. It was a decently powerful car. It topped out at about 125 mph, which is pretty good for a diesel. The only guys passing me were M3s and S4s.

I envy you. If there are two things I ever do in Europe, it's ride on the entire French high speed rail system and drive on the German Autobahn.

Diesel is a trade-off, and I wonder it better fuel economy is a good trade-off for cleaner air. Hopefully, the introduction of ultra low sulfur diesel will make diesel clean enough for American tastes.

My complaint isn't so much that I can't import diesels, but I can't import any Euro-spec car regardless of its fuel type.

Sadly, the only true means of reducing fuel consumption is to promote the use of mass transit, but that in turn requires land use patterns that most Americans would detest, and require a radical re-working of our cities. It would require us to make sacrifices, and spend large amounts of government money that we're not interested in spending, nor raising through increased taxation.

[David Alexander]

Too bad he didn't mention nuclear power. If the French can do it, so can we. When the lefty environmentalists complain that nuclear power is bad for children and other living things, the response could be that the wholesome French do it so it must be OK.

The problem with nuclear energy isn't so much the security concerns in regards to terrorism, or even nuclear fallout from Chernobyl type incidents, but the main problem is what to do with the wastes. The one site we've found happens to be an increasingly politically active state with a large tourism industry and a majority leader in a house of Congress.

IIRC, the French nuclear program reprocesses their spent nuclear fuel for reuse and additionally does it for other nations who periodically send it via freight rail or barge. The United States does not reprocess nuclear fuel for fear of nuclear proliferation, and has not done so since 1977 based on India's nuclear weapons programme being based on reprocessed fuels.

The US is like the Middle East of coal (there has been a coal fire burning in NE Pennsylvania for years). We should also drill for oil off our continental shelves.

Actually, one of the bizzare things that I've proposed is that we should follow Nazi Germany's and Apartheid South Africa's lead and liquefy coal and use it as low sulfur diesel fuel.

"Sadly, the only true means of reducing fuel consumption is to promote the use of mass transit, but that in turn requires land use patterns that most Americans would detest, and require a radical re-working of our cities. It would require us to make sacrifices, and spend large amounts of government money that we're not interested in spending, nor raising through increased taxation."

I for one am happy to take all the money wasted on education in this country and use it to increase our amount and quality of mass transit, not to mention increased fuel efficiency technology research. Sacrificing "education" is something I'll gladly do. But of course, we can't leave any child behind or something. I think the Dept. of Ed had a budget of 19 billion last year. That would massively improve mass transit all over the nation. We might actually get a tangible return on our tax dollars with a real concrete product.

"The United States does not reprocess nuclear fuel for fear of nuclear proliferation, and has not done so since 1977 based on India's nuclear weapons programme being based on reprocessed fuels."

A truly idiotic policy on our part. Just about everybody with the cash, patience and technology (either bought or homegrown) is building nuclear weapons, Iran, North Korea, etc... and it certainly didn't stop teh Pakistanis. Not having access to reprocessed US nuclear material has hardly stopped them anyway, so why should that hold ourselves back from energy independence?

[superdestroyer]

To Posted by: | January 24, 2007 at 12:53 PM

I think you mean public transportation. Currently in the United States, the masses drive to work in their own cars and trucks.

Publican trasnportation does not work because I do not feel like standing around at a bus stop in a large city where I am a target for the homeless and criminals. I also really dislike riding in filthy subway cars and being left on the landing while waiting for a train that is over 30 minutes late.

[before sunrise]

HS, could you clarify for me what you mean by "Bush doesn't care about preserving our nation the way it is."? What does "preserving the nation as it is" mean? What would you like to remain the same that would be changed with this policy? Eventhough I do agree that allowing anyone to become a citizen and work here is not the way to go, I'm not sure I understand this statement.

[David Alexander]

I think you mean public transportation. Currently in the United States, the masses drive to work in their own cars and trucks.

No, it's mass transit, as in the mass movement of people in one conveyance, as opposed to cars where only a few people travel in one car.

Also, why are your assessments of what constitutes mass transit stuck in 1970s visions of the bad old days? Bus stops are perfectly safe, crime is low in the various subway systems around the country, and in most cases, railway systems around the country have on-time performance ratings in ranging from 85 to 95%. Cleanliness varies from system to system, but I'd consider most systems to be relatively clean.

Fighting viewpoints like yours is why any expansion of mass transit is an uphill battle.

[The Engineer]

Mass transit doesn't make sense for rich people (and I mean rich in global terms).

Think about it. How much is David Alexander's time worth? How much of his time is wasted when he takes mass transit, even in places like Manhattan.

Mass transit makes sense for India, Brazil, and China (at least for now), but it doesn't make sense for Americans or Western Europeans. Our time is simply too valuable.

Automobiles are a wonderful productivity tool. We would be much poorer without them. And Europeans who are forced to take mass transit by government policy are much poorer for it.

[Half Sigma]

Manhattan has taxicabs, which are less expensive and more efficient than trying to drive and park your own car. Although there are certain times of day when taxicabs are hard to find, so it's not a perfect way for rich people to travel.

People who can afford to keep a car in Manhattan generally only drive it when they need to leave Manhattan.

In any place other than dense cities, public transportation is inefficient because you spend too much time waiting for it, and then walking from the transit stop to your final destination.

[The Engineer]

>>If there are two things I ever do in Europe, it's ride on the entire French high speed rail system and drive on the German Autobahn.

Yeah, I've done both. The TGV is an awesome experience (although the conductors' customer service could be much improved!).

Not every aspect of French society is to be loathed. For whatever reason, they have embraced nuclear energy and high speed rail. I for one think that is to be admired, although the libertarian in me wonders if Big Government in France is just powerful enough to roll over the opposition.

[Peter]

On the other hand, when using transit you can read or work on your computer. When driving you have to, well, drive.

[probligo]

Ah but the day when France was an international pariah seems long past, huh!

Why didn't someone think of the idea to start limiting gasolene useage four years ago?

Why was Kyoto dumped rather than becoming a work in progress?

Next thing will be enshrinement of the ICJ in US law! Wouldn't that be a turnaround?

Then the old cynic kicks in ... and the stench of rotting red herrings...

[David Alexander]

Think about it. How much is David Alexander's time worth? How much of his time is wasted when he takes mass transit, even in places like Manhattan.

I'm a roadgeek and a railfan so my allegiances are divided in terms of transport usage. Each has its own aspects that work and don't work. I'd much rather take the railroad to and from Manhattan than deal with the mess on the Parkway and LIE and deal with having to pay for gas, parking, and tolls. In contrast, Long Island's skeletal bus system isn't worth using for most of my day to day errands. In turn, if I'm going on a day trip to the centre core of a city in the Northeast, I'm much more inclined to take Amtrak than to drive.

I've worked in Manhattan and Long Island, and if I worked on the island, I'd drive, but if I worked in Manhattan, I'd take the train. Each choice isn't based so much on time savings, but convenience for me.

Of course, if you can come up with a better way to move a large group of people to one central location like a central business district, then I'd love to hear it.

Automobiles are a wonderful productivity tool. We would be much poorer without them. And Europeans who are forced to take mass transit by government policy are much poorer for it.

Yes that's somewhat true, but think about how much petroleum that they're not using, or how many pollutants they're not releasing. Shit, the reason that the Autobahn works so well is that the Europeans built such excellent railway systems that allow people who don't like to drive or suck at driving an alternative option.

Oddly, the poor nations have the worst mass transit systems. China's building all of these beautiful shiny mass transit systems, but the systems are seeing low use because some of the locals are too poor to use it.

In any place other than dense cities, public transportation is inefficient because you spend too much time waiting for it, and then walking from the transit stop to your final destination.

That's the problem. Mass transit in turn works with a certain kind of development pattern which is much common in Europe, and to a lesser extent, older suburbs in the Northeast and other parts of Anglosphere. Hence why in the United States, the most successful mass transit systems are in the Northeast.

On the other hand, when using transit you can read or work on your computer. When driving you have to, well, drive.

Or sleep as I do sometimes.

[David Alexander]

Yeah, I've done both. The TGV is an awesome experience (although the conductors' customer service could be much improved!).

Damn you. Once I get my financial and educational house in order, that's what I'm basically going to start stashing away cash for.

Not every aspect of French society is to be loathed. For whatever reason, they have embraced nuclear energy and high speed rail. I for one think that is to be admired, although the libertarian in me wonders if Big Government in France is just powerful enough to roll over the opposition.

As a Francophile, I'll be the first to tell you that there's good and bad in French culture, and that's true about any culture.

Yes, in France, Big Government is powerful enough to simply roll over the opposition. Coincidentally it helps that the environmental movement in France is weaker than in other European countries.

[superdestroyer]

David,

It is also easier for Europe to have public transportation because they are generally small countries Germany is not much bigger than the State of Oregon) and because they are not growing in population.

Look at how cities like Washington, DC have extreme problems when they try to extend their existing public transportation systems.

When was the last time that NYC opened a new subway station?

[AllanF]

RE: transit

There is another option between cars and traditional mass transit. When given a little bit of infrastructure support, it works great both in dense urban cores and moderately sprawled suburbia. As a kicker, it helps tremendously in the battle against obesity. The third way is the not so simple bicycle.

It won't work for everyone (what solution does?), but for a majority of Americans it could cut their consumption of foreign oil markedly.

All it needs is a little support by way of special paths in some places and separated lanes in others.

[Spungen]

HS, could you clarify for me what you mean by "Bush doesn't care about preserving our nation the way it is."? What does "preserving the nation as it is" mean?

Don't worry, Before Sunrise, I think it's mainly Mexican immigrants they're against, not Brazilians. ;)

[Spungen]

I don't think women are ever going to like mass transit as much as men do. Metrolink actually has a decent system running from some outlying areas to downtown Los Angeles, where I worked for a while, and I took it a few times. But I'll admit it, I didn't like having to dress up for work and mingle with a bunch of strange men. Even though it was mainly work commuters, not indigents. The men greatly outnumbered the women, and I almost never saw another woman under 40. Especially not dressed the way I was. And the law partners made fun of me for doing it so I gave it up.

[David Alexander]

It is also easier for Europe to have public transportation because they are generally small countries Germany is not much bigger than the State of Oregon) and because they are not growing in population.

I believe you're conflating inter-city rail service with regional and urban rail systems. Plus, I stopped buying the "not dense enough" excuse years ago. Australia has a much more robust regional network and sparse, but useful rail service than the US, and their density is much lower nationally. There are plenty of places rail could work, and even as a road user, rail is a benefit because it gets all the people who hate driving off the roads.

Look at how cities like Washington, DC have extreme problems when they try to extend their existing public transportation systems.

Actually, Washington DC has been one of the better systems in terms of expansion here in the States. It's the only subway system in the country to complete its original master plan, and it recently opened a extended one of its lines in 2006.

The main issue with transit systems in the United States is the high expense in constructing these systems whether if they're subways, light rail, or commuter rail due to various regulatory concerns. Tunnels cost lots of money, private rights of way above ground aren't easily available in some cities, and the privately owned railroads are loathe to allow passenger service on their lines even if compensated.

When was the last time that NYC opened a new subway station?

December 1988.

New York City's problem is due to mismanagement, NIMBYs, and underfunding by the authorities in charge of running the subway system and that fact that more critical and urgent needs were dealt with first when the capital plans were issued.

[Spungen]

Bush doesn't care about preserving our nation the way it is. Big thumbs down to Bush.

This phrasing did make me curious. Since when does Half Sigma like our nation "the way it is?" I've heard anti-immigration arguments from him based upon economics, but never before based (apparently) on culture or race.

[David Alexander]

I don't think women are ever going to like mass transit as much as men do.

Whenever I ride the subway or the bus, I've actually noticed more females than males. I've actually been in situations where I was the only adult male on the bus, especially in my former black middle class neighbourhood.

As for the Long Island Railroad, it depends. Sometimes, I'll see more men off peak riding during the week, and on weekends and holidays, more females. Rush hours, it's slightly more males, I'd guess in a 60/40 arrangement.

But I'll admit it, I didn't like having to dress up for work and mingle with a bunch of strange men.

Wait, you don't dress up for work? I thought you were a lawyer.

Also, your strange men comment leads me to believe that as a society, we're afraid of our own shadows. Of course, trying to convince Americans of the positives of mass transit is almost pointless and one of the reasons I probably won't leave the New York City metro area, if not the Northeast

The men greatly outnumbered the women, and I almost never saw another woman under 40.

You probably live in one of those evil right-wing places where the women are trapped at home as babymakers.

I live in Northern NJ. If they expanded the PATH system or Bergen light rail farther west, I couldn't be happier. I can't imagine I'm th only one. NJ Transit isn't a 24 hr service (though it should be) like the PATH (albeit with reduced service during late nights and very early mornings). There is all this concern about traffic on Rt. 80 and there was even a plan to build a rail line some years ago, but it never came to fruition for a number of reasons.
My parents still live down in Central NJ and a nice side benefit of living close to the train station is that it has increased home prices (although that arguement does not really work for Paterson). I have always been of the opinion regarding rail service that if you build it, they will come. Maybe not right away, but it sure beats trying to do it when you are in a traffic and development crunch. And no driving drunk when you go into town for the evening, no outrageous parking costs and worrying about your vehicle either, tunnel and bridge traffic, etc...
On a side note, NJ is also criscrossed with unused rail lines. Who owns them? I have no clue. I say that they get put to use instead of just growing weeds.

[Spungen]

David A., I said I didn't like it, not that I was afraid. That is how most women feel about strange (meaning, we don't know them and don't have a lot in common with them, not that they're necessarily weird) men, whether we admit it or not. Especially when there's a substantial age difference. We just would prefer not to be around them in close quarters.

Plus, it's just unpleasant to be a minority, to stand out and attract attention. A lone woman, especially in a suit w/briefcase, stands out. (I think you misread the sentence re having to dress up.)

Any suburb out here would fit your description, whether right-wing boondocks or high-priced liberal. When I drove around downtown, I'd count 10 male drivers for every 1 female driver. It must be that men comprise more of the workforce, at least that which involves commuting places or working in metropolitan areas.

"This phrasing did make me curious. Since when does Half Sigma like our nation "the way it is?" I've heard anti-immigration arguments from him based upon economics, but never before based (apparently) on culture or race."

I'm glad I wasn't the only one curious about this statement. I'm mostly curious as to what HS means by "the way it is", because I don't think he is referring to culture or race (this country is already too mixed for him to worry about that)!!

"Don't worry, Before Sunrise, I think it's mainly Mexican immigrants they're against, not Brazilians. ;)"

Phew, I though I was about to be deported ;-)

[David Alexander]

24 January @ 5:08 PM, there are some plans to improve the rail service in Bergen and Passaic Counties, but I wouldn't expect much of them anytime soon. One plan involves limited service from Sparta to Hoboken via Paterson. Another plan is for service through areas such as Bogota, Teaneck, Bergenfield, Dumont, Northvale and into Orangetown in Rockland County. There are also two plans for extending the Hudson Bergen Light Rail, one northward into Ridgefield and Tenafly, and another along Hackensack, Saddle Brook, and Elmwood Park to Paterson.

Most of these plans are basically plans at this point, especially with "regime change" ongoing at New Jersey Transit.

On a side note, NJ is also criscrossed with unused rail lines. Who owns them? I have no clue. I say that they get put to use instead of just growing weeds.

A lot of the unused trackage is owned by various large Class I privately owned freight rail corporations, like CSX Transportation or Norfolk Southern Railway. Others are owned by small local companies who specialize in small localized transport from big companies to small companies.

For New Jersey Transit to start service, they would need capital funds to purchase (or lease) the the right of way, rehabilitate the track, sometimes add new tracks, implement signaling, place stations, and buy equipment for the service. So, unless lots of money is available, don't expect those lines to be used for passenger service anytime soon.

I feel like I'm going to blush. :)

[David Alexander]

Plus, it's just unpleasant to be a minority, to stand out and attract attention. A lone woman, especially in a suit w/briefcase, stands out. (I think you misread the sentence re having to dress up.)

No, I understood dress up to be "suit". When you said that you didn't like to dress up, I was surprised that as a lawyer, you were not wearing a suit on a daily basis.

Any suburb out here would fit your description, whether right-wing boondocks or high-priced liberal. When I drove around downtown, I'd count 10 male drivers for every 1 female driver. It must be that men comprise more of the workforce, at least that which involves commuting places or working in metropolitan areas.

So it seems that Southern California is the home to an oppressive lifestyle. I'd expect such behaviour from conservatives, but never from liberals.

It's also quite possible that women in the suburbs tend to work closer to home because they're burdened with tending to the children.

[Spungen]

It's also quite possible that women in the suburbs tend to work closer to home because they're burdened with tending to the children.

Bingo. Although not everone would characterize this as a "burden."

Less work = oppressed? Some people would disagree.

The lengthy commutes are certainly oppressive.

My sentence should be read as, "I had to be around a bunch of strange men, which I disliked, and the fact that I had to dress up every day in a suit, thus making me stand out more, made me dislike the situation even more."

[The Engineer]

>>New York City's problem is due to mismanagement, NIMBYs, and underfunding by the authorities in charge of running the subway system

You missed the biggest reason that public transportation doesn't work: public employee unions.

Privatized mass transit that really went after union fetherbedding, work rules, and salaries, might actually make mass transit workable in the US. As it is right now, fares alone can't support the service because union salaries and work rules make the labor cost much higher than the revenue.

But public employees run the Democrat party, so that will never happen.

[The Engineer]

Did you guys ever see "Crash"? I love the black kid's take on LA's bus system. Only the damned ride it.

Of course, at the end of the movie, who's on the bus? That was just classic.

[David Alexander]

Privatized mass transit that really went after union fetherbedding, work rules, and salaries, might actually make mass transit workable in the US. As it is right now, fares alone can't support the service because union salaries and work rules make the labor cost much higher than the revenue.

Here's where things get messy. When one says do you mean publically owned, but privately operated transit? The cost-effectiveness is dubious on those systems because the so-called savings end up being eaten up by the contractor as their profit.

New Jersey Transit has used public-private agreements known as DBOM (design-build-operate-maintain) agreements where a consortium agrees to pretty much carry out the construction AND operation of a line for 10 to 15 years in exchange for a fixed amount provided up front. The idea is that it saves money and gets around the various work rules. Interestingly, some of the workers at one of the projects is considering unionizing because they feel cheated out of the raises they were promised when they were employed when the line opened.

Now, if you're discussing privately owned AND operated transit, the only place in the world it's successful is Japan and Hong Kong, and that's because gasoline is expensive, cars are taxed considerably, and the railway firms have lots of real estate holdings near their tracks and stations.

Of course, the easy solution is to build automated systems that require less employees. The problem is that light rail systems are currently what the government encourages for new build systems, and those systems cannot use automated driverless systems because many of them have street running segments. Plus, many cities use admittedly use the light rail systems as a job programme for some of the less educated whites and lower class, yet, employable minorities.

BTW, Engineer, are you a Civil Engineer?

[Eric the Red]

"Did you guys ever see "Crash"? I love the black kid's take on LA's bus system. Only the damned ride it."

The statement above is so true. Mass transit will never catch on in Southern California because only the poor ride the bus system here. Plus, people love their cars here (more Ferraris are sold in Southern California than everywhere else in the USA combined). LA was designed as a car city.

[David Alexander]

Did you guys ever see "Crash"? I love the black kid's take on LA's bus system. Only the damned ride it.

One of the bizzare things that I've noticed is that in the US the middle class hates buses, but doesn't mind streetcars or light rail. In contrast, in Canada, the middle class there seems to have less qualms about riding on the bus.

[Spungen]

Just for the record, Metrolink is rail.

[David Alexander]

Bingo. Although not everone would characterize this as a "burden."

Less work = oppressed? Some people would disagree.

The lengthy commutes are certainly oppressive.

There's this liberal claptrappy thinking within me that says it's wrong that We dump the so-called "women's work" ranging from cooking, cleaning, and tending to the children on women while the men get away scott-free with doing nothing.

It's also very disheartening seeing all these potential smart professional women waste away in possibly shitty suburban jobs or at home saddled with kids.

My sentence should be read as, "I had to be around a bunch of strange men, which I disliked, and the fact that I had to dress up every day in a suit, thus making me stand out more, made me dislike the situation even more."

I always had this expectation of a law office to have the attorneys in suits all the time.

[Spungen]

I always had this expectation of a law office to have the attorneys in suits all the time.

Well, then, your expectation was met. Except we had "casual Friday," and "casual summer," which meant Banana Republic.

There's this liberal claptrappy thinking within me that says it's wrong that We dump the so-called "women's work" ranging from cooking, cleaning, and tending to the children on women while the men get away scot-free with doing nothing.

Agreed. Good thing none of the men I know are like that.

It's also very disheartening seeing all these potential smart professional women waste away in possibly shitty suburban jobs or at home saddled with kids.

Trust me, there are plenty of shitty urban jobs to waste away in too, professional and otherwise. It ain't Sigourney Weaver in "Working Girl."

[David Alexander]

Agreed. Good thing none of the men I know are like that.

I stumble my way through various feminist blogs from time to time. Admittedly, it can make one feel sad, guilty, and pessimistic about the world.

[Tex]

There's this liberal claptrappy thinking within me that says it's wrong that We dump the so-called "women's work" ranging from cooking, cleaning, and tending to the children on women while the men get away scott-free with doing nothing.

But housework is associated with a lower risk of breast cancer in a way that recreational and occupational activity is not:

Article from Medical News Today

Paper from Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention

Since dudes don't have ta-tas, the marginal benefits are not likely to be as large for men as they are for women.

[Before Sunrise]

"Since dudes don't have ta-tas, the marginal benefits are not likely to be as large for men as they are for women."

Eventhough there is a much greater number of women who get breast cancer, men get it too.

[bbartlog]

For what it's worth I ride the bus to work here in Pittsburgh... makes more financial sense to me than getting a second car, and my wife needs the primary most days of the week to run errands. I'm guessing that a lot of people in my situation would choose to spend the money to get a second vehicle though.

[Tex]

Over the next year, a few hundred men will die from breast cancer. Compare that to the tens of thousands of women who will die from it. The odds of a women dying from breast cancer is two full orders of magnitude larger than the odds for a man.

A guy has a bigger chance of dying from a fall down a staircase than from breast cancer.

See here and use the "Find" function to search for "malignant neoplasm of breast"

[Douglas Knight]

Bush did mention nucular power.

Mass transit: Don't forget deregulated taxis, like commuters with cars picking up commuters without cars. Probably more efficient than any other form of mass transit. On the subject of taxi regulation, last I heard, (2004?) hybrid taxis were illegal in NYC. But I heard because someone was close to changing it.

Coal liquefaction: It's cost-effective at the moment, but there are lots of sources of oil that are supposed to be cheaper. It has 10 to 1 rates of conversion. I'm not sure what happens to the rest of the coal, but I'd all the CO2 gets released. But coal is so awful, I'm inclined to think it a better choice.
In general, I think local pollution is much worse than global problems like CO2. In particular, diesel is worse than gas. But I think there are some modern diesel designs that are pretty good.

Breast cancer: that study doesn't seem to control for number of children, which might be correlated with housework. Before Sunrise: isn't the slogan: men at 80 are like women at 20?

[Before Sunrise]

Thanks Tex, interesting information. I didn't realise that the number was so much larger for women than men.

"Before Sunrise: isn't the slogan: men at 80 are like women at 20?"

I've never heard that. Who said that?

[Tex]

Thanks Tex, interesting information. I didn't realise that the number was so much larger for women than men.

Likely the "men get breast cancer too" meme gets circulated as a method of engendering support among men for the fight against it. A more effective means to that ends would be "your daughter, sister, cousin, wife, mother, friend is at risk". After all, "your son, brother, cousin, husband, father is at risk for prostate cancer". :^)

Breast cancer: that study doesn't seem to control for number of children, which might be correlated with housework.

Good point. Number of births may effect hormone levels that effect the expression of breast cancer. The n-size of the study is over 200,000 so it should be easy to rework the numbers and still get a statistically valid result. If family size is the cause, then much or all of the association should disappear after controlling for family size.

The novel finding of the study is that housework is inversely associated with breast cancer in a way that occupational and recreational activity is not. But then, occupational and recreational activity may be inversely related to number of children. More kids means less time for job and gym.

[Joe Average]

What does "preserving the nation as it is" mean?

For a book length answer to the question, you might consider Samuel Huntington's "Who Are We?"

http://www.amazon.com/Who-Are-Challenges-National-Identity/dp/0684870533

The nation, at its core, is Anglo-Protestant. Given the size of the population, the geographical proximity its source, and the historical grievances that exist, immigrants from the Hispanic Americas pose a unique threat to "the nation as it is" in a way that a few high IQ immigrants from Brazil do not, at least until the current bumper-crop of immigrants have assimilated for a few generations.

[SFG]

Yeah. If people come in slowly enough you can turn them into Americans. The periods of anti-immigrant reaction after the major waves of immigration may ironically have had the salutary effect of making the immigrants assimilate (though I doubt that's what the nativists had in mind!)

Too many at one time though...

[GMR]

A big problem for mass transit in the suburbs is parking. Out here in Connecticut, pretty much all commuter lots are filled well before 7 am each day. Waiting lists for permits can be 4 to 6 years.

Local zoning boards fiercely resist parking garages because that will supposedly lead to more traffic. Darien recently rejected a parking garage at Metro North for this very reason.

Some RR stations have shuttle buses, but they only go in commuter hours, and it adds a significant amount of time to the commute.

I work out in the suburbs, but if I have a meeting in NYC I just drive because of the parking situation at local RR stations.

It happens everywhere: parking isn't sufficient. Parking garages are relatively cheap compared to the mass transit system, but there never seems to be enough parking.

[superdestroyer]

David,

Since I live in DC, a few remarks about rail and subway. I have ridden the train four time in January and it was late twice. The one time it was on time there were no seats at my stop so I ended up standing for 40 minutes. The VRE and MARC trains are consistently late and the biggest VRE line, the Fredricksburg line is losing riders because it is so undependable.

The Metro is better but just had a derailing accident that took EMS over 30 minutes to respond to the area.

If I drive to my office it takes 40 minutes in the morning and 60 minutes in the evening (normal operations). If I take the train and it runs on time it takes 70 minutes in the morning and 90 minutes in the evening. It can take over 2 hours to get home if the subway is late and I miss a train and have to wait another 30 minutes.

Instead of reading or working on their computer, most people on the train sleep/doze. I find it much more restful to drive and listen to music/radio instead of riding the train.

I also notice that the train is more male than female and trends older.

In Northern Virginia it is much easier and more efficient to “slug” into downtown instead of use See http://www.slug-lines.com/

Engineer,

DC has the same problem with its transit workers. When gasoline prices went to $3.00 per gallon, Metro rider-ship went to an all time high and it still lost tens of millions of dollars. Most of the Metro workers seem to stand around a lot. It has also been shown that the bus driver taken far too many breaks and do not follow their schedules.

GMR,

Taking is also an issue in DC. The end of the Metrolines all have huge parking lots that fill up before 8:00 A.M. They finally started saving some pots that cannot be filled until after 10:00. In Springfield Virginia, Metro doubled the size of the lot and it is still too small.

[Half Sigma]

Local zoning boards fiercely resist parking garages because that will supposedly lead to more traffic.

NIMBYism at its finest.

[The Engineer]

DA, I'm a Mech E. Like all engineers, I know everything about everything.

Actually, I've worked in the nuclear, natural gas, and refinery fields. Currently I'm in the diesel engine field, working on emissions controls. But there's a lot of refinery work going on in Chicago, and it's probably my best bet to make 6 figures without consulting on the side, so I may get sucked back in.

[David Alexander]

Since I live in DC, a few remarks about rail and subway.

VRE and MARC suffer from the fact that most of their lines are operated on the tracks of the privately held freight lines, especially CSX, which has been loathe to allow rail transport on their lines. The best way to improve reliability would be to electrify and own the tracks and dispatching, but that would require money that the states of Virginia and Maryland are loathe to spend the money to run a proper service that would justify electrification, and CSX Transportation and Norfolk Southern has no interest in selling their mainlines. MARC also has the additional negative of being operated by Amtrak who generally holds MARC trains to give priority to late running Acelas and Regional trains.

I find it much more restful to drive and listen to music/radio instead of riding the train.

They got these nice useful things called Walkmans and iPods...

In Northern Virginia it is much easier and more efficient to “slug” into downtown instead

The slugs work in Northern VA because there are plenty of HOV lanes that lead into the CBD, hence why the HOV lanes are some of the better used ones in the country. Mind you, it's still less efficient than a 10 car train holding 1000 people.

[David Alexander]

DA, I'm a Mech E. Like all engineers, I know everything about everything.

Actually, I've worked in the nuclear, natural gas, and refinery fields. Currently I'm in the diesel engine field, working on emissions controls. But there's a lot of refinery work going on in Chicago, and it's probably my best bet to make 6 figures without consulting on the side, so I may get sucked back in.

Interesting, had I stuck around in Civil Engineering, I probably would have gone into transport and probably go for a masters in Urban Planning, and then attempt to do liberal-claptrappy development schemes geared towards transit, yet some what low density in design.

Now, if you were a EE, I'd bug you on how IGBT works, but I'll leave the bus fans to pester you on diesel engines. :)

[The Engineer]

>>Interesting, had I stuck around in Civil Engineering,

See, you should have. All those first and second year courses are just weed out courses, especially in CivE (my wife's undergraduate degree in in CivE). Once you got to the third year, especially if you were a transportation guy, the mathematical rigor of the courses decreased. They would have interested you more.

Like I said before, working for the DOT on LI is an attainable gig for someone with a CivE degree. The jobs go begging.

[The Engineer]

Without a doubt, except in a very few cases, it is difficult to get anywhere faster via public transportation than by car. Even if you can multitask on the train, if it takes you 90 minutes instead of 60, that's a lot of time to make up.

I've got a Panasonic Avic-Z1 nav system in my car. It's got a bluetooth adapter, so I can use my Treo 700p with it. I've got an app that reads my e-mail, so I can catch up on that while driving. Then I use the dictation recording feature on the Treo to reply, and use Naturally Speaking to write what I've dictated when I get to work.

So, maybe technology makes the damned more productive while they're on public transportation, but it also makes me more productive when I'm stuck in traffic.

Also, the Avic does real time traffic over XM. It actually works wonderfuly for Chicago. That's why I got the thing in the first place. It also has a backup camera, a DVD player (drives 2 LCD's in the back seat for the rug rats) and a TV tuner. I've hacked it so that I can watch TV or a DVD while driving (not that I do that, but I could).

Oh, and I could get an iPod interface, but I don't do Apple. The Avic has a small hard drive, and I've got my favorite CD's ripped to it. I don't use it much, I listen to XM.

I love technology.

[David Alexander]

See, you should have. All those first and second year courses are just weed out courses, especially in CivE (my wife's undergraduate degree in in CivE). Once you got to the third year, especially if you were a transportation guy, the mathematical rigor of the courses decreased. They would have interested you more.

I hated all of the first year courses with a passion. I think the only courses that made me feel content were my lit classes. Plus, it's a bad sign when you fail Physics I twice. Sadly, there's no transportation-related field without passing through the civil engineering route, so I bailed. Plus, there was a good chance that I'd never end up designing the ideal system that I used to dream of designing.

So, maybe technology makes the damned more productive while they're on public transportation, but it also makes me more productive when I'm stuck in traffic.

Eww. Pay attention to the road, not your damned Treo.

[The Engineer]

>>Pay attention to the road, not your damned Treo.

Just say no to texting while driving.

I try not to read e-mail while driving. That's why I got the app that reads the e-mail over the Avic.

The Avic syncs your contacts with the Treo and has voice dialing. I can just say, "Call David Alexander" and it will call you. So at least I don't need to dial while driving.

I'll defintely get the adaptive cruise control on the Bimmer. That will at least keep me from rear ending somebody. Too bad you can't get the lane wandering warning system that Infiniti has. At that point the car pretty much drives itself on the interstate. I think that the adaptive cruise can handle bumper to bumper traffic itself, too.

[superdestroyer]

David,

If you really want to get into transportation planning have you looked at civil technology instead of civil engineering. I had a friend go this route and he is a county engineer now (doing transportation projects).

You could then aim at a masters in Urban planning.

[The Engineer]

>>If you really want to get into transportation planning have you looked at civil technology instead of civil engineering.

I'd second that. Engineering technology degrees don't require things like calculus and physics (the weed out courses). They're more process based rather than theory based.

The only problem is that you need to go to colleges like SUNYIT, in beautiful Utica, New York. Or Alfred U, or Rochester. You're not going to be able to do this from Bellmore.