Cost of a Traffic Signal ??

[Baphomet]

On 9 Dec 2003 09:24:21 -0800, [email protected] (mark hahn) wrote:

[snip]

I would like to point though that at least in the US, automobilists do
not actually pay for all the costs associated with using the roads.
Fuel taxes (criminally low in the US IMHO) [snip]
Mark Hahn

"Criminally low"?? Why do you think that?

'cos we have to pay $6 per gallon and it's not fair, (stamps feet and
shouts)

Yeah...but Mark is from the Hudson Valley ;-)

 

[Jim Thompson]

On 9 Dec 2003 09:24:21 -0800, [email protected] (mark hahn) wrote:

[snip]

I would like to point though that at least in the US, automobilists do
not actually pay for all the costs associated with using the roads.
Fuel taxes (criminally low in the US IMHO) [snip]
Mark Hahn

"Criminally low"?? Why do you think that?

...Jim Thompson

I think Mark is feeling the European's pain ;-)

He should move to Europe and get the full enjoyment ;-)

...Jim Thompson

 

[Jim Thompson]

On 9 Dec 2003 09:24:21 -0800, [email protected] (mark hahn) wrote:

[snip]

I would like to point though that at least in the US, automobilists do
not actually pay for all the costs associated with using the roads.
Fuel taxes (criminally low in the US IMHO) [snip]
Mark Hahn

"Criminally low"?? Why do you think that?

'cos we have to pay $6 per gallon and it's not fair, (stamps feet and
shouts)

The joys of a socialist society ;-)

Do you really pay ** $6 *** per gallon?

I think we pay around 60-70¢ per gallon.

If that were to go up significantly there would be politicians hanging
from every telephone pole ;-)

...Jim Thompson

 

[Keith R. Williams]

On 9 Dec 2003 09:24:21 -0800, [email protected] (mark hahn) wrote:

[snip]
I would like to point though that at least in the US, automobilists do
not actually pay for all the costs associated with using the roads.
Fuel taxes (criminally low in the US IMHO)
[snip]
Mark Hahn

"Criminally low"?? Why do you think that?

'cos we have to pay $6 per gallon and it's not fair, (stamps feet and
shouts)

Yeah...but Mark is from the Hudson Valley ;-)

That *is* criminal (lived there for ~20 years - gack!).

 

[John S. Dyson]

What gets me is:

* People driving without headlights on purpose because it's "cool"

* People who don't turn on their headlights until they are moving in
traffic (if the car starts, turning on the headlights will not drain the
battery enough to make it stall!).

* People driving with headlights off but using "fog lights" of some
least-useful design that directs light into other road users' eyes more
than anywhere else (fog lights should illuminate road surface and keep
their light low).

* People using blue-filtered fake-HID headlights, then driving in the
city with their high beams on because the low beams are too dim

* People not expecting bikes or whatever on the road! Whatever part of
their brains their eyes are connected to is not looking for bikes!
"Bike, what bike? *SMASH!* Oh, the one that was in front of me!" Yes,

* People who walk/bike along the side of major roads, late at night,
without any special/obvious reflective clothing.

Last night (not really late, perhaps 6-7pm), I had two instances of
individuals with dark clothes and dark skin (dark features), one
biking and one walking close to the edge of a major side-street,
without side-walks and without much local street-lighting.

One doesn't have to be a brain surgeon (but will probably soon
need one), that wearing bright color (reflective) clothing when
walking/biking on poorly lighted streets is a VERY WISE idea.

It seems like there should be a good market for clothing patches
that have reflective or florescent attributes. (I guess that in
some situations, that could be counter-productive -- but most areas
around where I live, the reflective gear seems to be a minimal
preparation for walking along main roads.)

John

 

[John Woodgate]

I read in sci.electronics.design that John S. Dyson <[email protected]>

* People who walk/bike along the side of major roads, late at night,
without any special/obvious reflective clothing.

In many European countries, cycles must have front and rear lights. The
law is often broken, though.

In Britain, the law originally specified 'incandescent' lights, because
acetylene lamps were not to be allowed any more. But now that means
(unless the law has recently changed) that LED lights are not legally
sufficient and have to be accompanied by incandescent lamps.

It seems like there should be a good market for clothing patches that
have reflective or florescent attributes. (I guess that in some
situations, that could be counter-productive -- but most areas around
where I live, the reflective gear seems to be a minimal preparation for
walking along main roads.)

Such clothing is freely available in Britain.

 

[Mjolinor]

On 9 Dec 2003 09:24:21 -0800, [email protected] (mark hahn) wrote:

[snip]
I would like to point though that at least in the US, automobilists do
not actually pay for all the costs associated with using the roads.
Fuel taxes (criminally low in the US IMHO)
[snip]
Mark Hahn

"Criminally low"?? Why do you think that?

'cos we have to pay $6 per gallon and it's not fair, (stamps feet and
shouts)

The joys of a socialist society ;-)

Do you really pay ** $6 *** per gallon?

I think we pay around 60-70¢ per gallon.

If that were to go up significantly there would be politicians hanging
from every telephone pole ;-)

We really do but our gallons are proper ones not US ones (slightly bigger)

(Don't take "proper" to be an attack on US V UK, I couldn't handle any more
of that in this newsgroup there has been too much of late)

 

[Don Klipstein]

I would like to point though that at least in the US, automobilists do
not actually pay for all the costs associated with using the roads.
Fuel taxes (criminally low in the US IMHO) only pay for between 35%
and 80% of the direct costs of roads. By direct costs I mean repairs,
new construction, etc. The rest comes from other local, state, and
federal taxes. Even people who never drive pay for "part" of the road.

A lot of original cost of building roads is not even paid by taxes, but
paid by home builders. That means some of my house payment (or rent) is
for paying off road building costs.

I give a varying range of percentages, because it depends on who's
statistics you believe. I have never come across a report that claims
fuel taxes pay for 100% of all road construction and repair.

I have heard a few claiming that road costs are less than fuel
taxes... maybe just the costs of maintaining and building state and
national highways, but definitely not roads in general! (And certainly I
think it's fair to use road taxes to help mass transit reduce traffic and
road wear, and how about then some - research into pollution-reduction
technology, etc.)

If you include hidden costs like: police and emergency services (some
states have laws preventing fuel taxes being used to pay for police);
the effects of air pollution (autos are still the major source of air
pollution in the US); the environmental costs of paving an ever
growing percentage of urban and suburban areas (up to 50% of some
urban areas are paved); and number of pedestrians and cyclists killed
by autos; autos don't pay their fair share.

So please don't tell me to get my bicycle off "your" road. It is "our"
road. We had better learn to share.

Mark Hahn

- Don Klipstein ([email protected])

 

[Don Klipstein]

I read in sci.electronics.design that John S. Dyson <[email protected]>


In many European countries, cycles must have front and rear lights. The
law is often broken, though.

In most states of the USA, lights are required for nighttime cycling.
But most bicycles are legally sold without lights.
I have a headlight for my bike (detachable) and a taillight for my left
rear pants pocket. One problem that I fear is people who think they
deserve free bicycle lights just because they see them on parked bicycles.

- Don Klipstein ([email protected])

 

[DarkMatter]

That depends where you live

Which I stated at the beginning of the post. I'm not talking about
some trolley service or reduced scale rail.

 

[DarkMatter]

My "aptitude"? I'll assume you're so enraged that you
misspelled "attitude".

No, dipshit... I meant aptitude. Your lame ass declaring that one
has to "cover one's own ass" is a proof that you do not have the
aptitude for the law or political atmosphere that surrounds the
subject. You are an abject retard.

I misspelled nothing, dipshit.

 

[DarkMatter]

Speaking of clues and preparedness, I'll bet you still
use pneumatic tubes.

You're an idiot. Offering a bet on a pure unknown is a sure proof.

 

[DarkMatter]

Now, lower your blood pressure

You're a goddamned idiot. boy. My blood pressure is fine.

and try to rationally
describe your plan for removing poor drivers.

Your a goddamned idiot, AND you're clueless.

Does it
involve shotguns, or legislation?
Yes.

Or do you plan to whine them away?

You're a goddamned idiot, boy.

 

[DarkMatter]

You consistently claim high moral ground with ease.

You consistently act like a fuking retard. I hope with great pains.

 

[DarkMatter]

Right. Your choice of language and your refusal to look
after your own safety in the absence of universal police
attention

Right. Ya fucking retarded twit. Your mother needed universal
police attention, but she didn't get it, and out of her ass popped
your lame, piece of shit ass.

coupled with legislation tailored to your wants
demonstrate that indisputably.

Besides being a piece of shit, you're a goddamned retard, boy.

Perhaps you'd be happier living in one of the wonderful
European nanny states.

Perhaps you'd be happier with one of my NYPD wooden, splintery
broomstick handles shoved two feet up yer lame, wussified ass.

Whatever. You keep fuming about stupid people as you ride
and I'll calmly keep my eyes open for them instead.

You're a goddamned retard though. One expects you to act stupid.

Your sense of safety is false and will bite you in the ass one day.
I hope.

 

[DarkMatter]

I would have to agree that bicyling steadily, without strenuous excercise,
does not consume large amounts of calories and the 30 calories per mile idea
sounds about right. If we eat a typical candybar, that's 250 calories, which
equates to about 8.3 miles if you wanted to "burn it off."

I ride hard to every destination. I am always pushing the limit of
the current riding circumstances.

Same with treadmills, once I saw one that had an electronic calorometer. I
jogged my ass off for 15 minutes and only burned like 50 calories... how
dissapointing.

How inaccurate. 15 minutes of running burns more than 50 calories.

Jogging... less... but running... no. Bad numbers.

 

[DarkMatter]

Unfortunately for bike riders the automobile drivers DO own the road. The
fuel
tax they pay build and maintain the roads. Bike riders do not contribute to
the
construction and maintainance of the roads yet they are allowed the same
access to the roads. And some still complain!

Bullshit, ya fuking retard. The roads are owned by ALL taxpayers,
not just auto owners. Monies taken in for registrations, and DLs go
into the general fund.

MOST states give bicycles vehicular status. Does your wee wittle
bwain have any grasp of the meaning of that term?

It means ALLOWED TO BE ON ANY PUBLIC ROADWAY. The only roads not
permitted are high speed freeways that have no safe roadside bike
travel provision.

Bone UP, ya retarded puke that should not even be allowed to drive
AT ALL!

 

[Mark Jones]

I have every message containing the words "twit", "retard", and "dumbass"
automatically blacklisted...

 

[Paul Burridge]

I have every message containing the words "twit", "retard", and "dumbass"
automatically blacklisted...

That should take care of every "contribution" from DM.

 

[DarkMatter]

That should take care of every "contribution" from DM.

You're both idiots.