The way to break out of the pro-car, anti-car debate?



"Plodder" <CORNED BEEF@NOSPAM> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Roger wrote:
>
> > > Why don't we do it in the road? A new school of
> > > traffic design says we should get rid of stop signs
and
> > red
> > > lights and let cars, bikes and people mingle together.
> > > It sounds
insane,
> > but
> > > it works.
> > >
> > Interesting concept which does not work - fatality
> > accidents and serious injury accidents throughout
> > countries which have next to no road rules
are
> > horrendous once out of the low speed congested areas.
> > City traffic flows
> at
> > the speed of the bikes therefore any impacts are low
> > speed and end up
with
> a
> > few harsh words and maybe a skinned knuckle.
> >
> > As for trying it in Aus - our traffic moves faster - we
> > dont have
> congested
> > roads by any world standard - you can drive at 100kph
> > and be expected to stop - bikes are a name for an easy
> > woman.
>
> I agree, the concept probably wouldn't work outside of
> cities and suburban areas, especially in Aus where people
> travel many kilometers at high
speeds
> as a matter of course. Nevertheless, I see no reason why
> the concept couldn't work in residential areas. Why not an
> artery system of major
roads
> retaining current road rules for high-speed, long-
> distance travel,
changing
> to the "intrigue" concept in city and residential streets?
> You can get to where you want fast and when you get there,
> you slow down. Doesn't seem hard...
>
> Frank
>
I drove in France when the give way to the right rule was
applied on practically every road - ie travelling along a
main road and a poxy little one lane side road with a
tractor/2CV/herd of goats would just come straight out. The
accidents were horrendous - but probably did more to reduce
the collective IQ of the French.

As for my previous post about congested roads in Aus - is
there one Australian city that takes longer than 1 hour in
peak hour traffic to cross? Paris used to take about 4
hours in normal traffic, London at least 2 from the end of
the M1 to the M23, Amsterdam - just one long congested road
from Rotherdam to Amsterdam, Brusselles the queues started
in Oostende.
 
Roger Martin wrote:

....snip.....

> As for my previous post about congested roads in Aus - is
> there one Australian city that takes longer than 1 hour in
> peak hour traffic to cross?

Yes, Sydney has been this way for decades.
 
"Terry Collins" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> Roger Martin wrote:
>
> ....snip.....
>
>> As for my previous post about congested roads in Aus - is
>> there one Australian city that takes longer than 1 hour
>> in peak hour traffic to cross?
>
> Yes, Sydney has been this way for decades.

And Melbourne.

--

A: Top-posters.
B: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?
 
"Charlie" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>>
> sure :) It did sound like you were suggesting the
> examination of processes without any understanding of the
> consequences (which leads to wild, invented conclusions of
> 0 value, imho) to be posessing of merit though. But I
> accept that's not what you meant...
>
> Charlie

Thank you... nice to have a recognition (not necessarily
agreement!) instead of the usual defensive stuff when a
statement is questioned (OK... I'm guilty too!).

Cheers,

Frank
 
DRS wrote:
>
> "D Walford" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
> > DRS wrote:
> >>
> >> Why don't we do it in the road? A new school of traffic
> >> design says we should get rid of stop signs and red
> >> lights and let cars, bikes and people mingle together.
> >> It sounds insane, but it works.
> >
> > Does it, the articles seems to ignore the huge amount of
> > death and injury on Chinese roads, a friend who recently
> > did 2 trips to China says that the death and injury rate
> > there is horrendous.
>
> Cites?
>
> > He also said that car travel in Shanghi is so slow its
> > quicker to walk provided you are willing to take the
> > risk of breathing the severely polluted air.
>
> Maybe that's so, yet how does he explain away the
> empirical evidence coming out of Europe to the contrary?
>

I didn't mention Europe, traffic in Asia already uses the
"anything goes" traffic managemant system and the traffic
jams and death and injury rates are very serious problems by
Australian standards. I can see such a system working in a
congested inner urban area, even maybe in the CBD of a major
Australian city but in outer urban areas where traffic moves
a lot faster IMO it would be a disaster. Roundabouts are a
current example of the chaos theory, no one seems to

through one without getting hit or abused you consider
yourself lucky:) I wonder how large trucks fit into the
theory? Their size means they always have right of way over
anything smaller, I'm being to like this idea:)

Daryl
 
On 26 May 2004 21:41:29 +1000, ? the Platypus {aka David Formosa}
<[email protected]> wrote:

>sheik yerbouti <[email protected]> writes:
>
>[...]
>
>> are you serious? their road death rates are many
>> times ours
>
>And in what terms? Deaths per head of population?

if you look at my post above, you'll see china's death rate
is many times ours.

i assume it's corrected for no. of motor vehicles, if not
they have an even more horrific record
 
"sheik yerbouti" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> On 26 May 2004 21:41:29 +1000, ? the Platypus {aka David
> Formosa} <[email protected]> wrote:
>> sheik yerbouti <[email protected]> writes:
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>> are you serious? their road death rates are many
>>> times ours
>>
>> And in what terms? Deaths per head of population?
>
> if you look at my post above, you'll see china's death
> rate is many times ours.

You haven't provided a shred of evidence to support
your claim.

--

A: Top-posters.
B: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?
 
"DRS" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> "sheik yerbouti" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
> > On 26 May 2004 21:41:29 +1000, ? the Platypus {aka David
> > Formosa} <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> sheik yerbouti <[email protected]> writes:
> >>
> >> [...]
> >>
> >>> are you serious? their road death rates are many times
> >>> ours
> >>
> >> And in what terms? Deaths per head of population?
> >
> > if you look at my post above, you'll see china's death
> > rate is many times ours.
>
> You haven't provided a shred of evidence to support
> your claim.

Sorry to just jump in, but I just typed "death rates auto
accidents china" into google and it spat out this:
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/FC26Ad01.html It
doesn't mention Australia per se but, and I could be
wrong, but I think the US death rates are higher than
ours, and this article states that China's rate of deaths
per 10000 autos is eight times that of the States. Of
course, they cite a major cause (12%) as being due to
crappy workmanship. Hope it helps.
 
"blah" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> "DRS" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:<[email protected]>...
>> "sheik yerbouti" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]
>>> On 26 May 2004 21:41:29 +1000, ? the Platypus {aka David
>>> Formosa} <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> sheik yerbouti <[email protected]> writes:
>>>>
>>>> [...]
>>>>
>>>>> are you serious? their road death rates are many times
>>>>> ours
>>>>
>>>> And in what terms? Deaths per head of population?
>>>
>>> if you look at my post above, you'll see china's death
>>> rate is many times ours.
>>
>> You haven't provided a shred of evidence to support
>> your claim.
>
> Sorry to just jump in,

Don't apologize for that, there's no such thing as "jumping
in" on Usenet.

> but I just typed "death rates auto accidents china" into
> google and it spat out this:
> http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/FC26Ad01.html It
> doesn't mention Australia per se but, and I could be
> wrong, but I think the US death rates are higher than
> ours, and this article states that China's rate of deaths
> per 10000 autos is eight times that of the States. Of
> course, they cite a major cause (12%) as being due to
> crappy workmanship. Hope it helps.

You've missed my point. Shane Stanley has already posted a
link to what are probably the best statistics on this issue.
My point is that this ****** "sheik yerbouti" never backs
his claims up with links or cites. In his "post above" he in
fact does not show that "china's death rate is many times
ours". In response to my request for sources he merely
stated "are you serious? their road death rates are many
times ours". That's it. He's never produced a shred of
actual evidence and shows no sign of ever doing so.

--

A: Top-posters.
B: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?
 
Originally posted by Drs

You've missed my point. Shane Stanley has already posted a
link to what are probably the best statistics on this issue.
My point is that this ****** "sheik yerbouti" never backs
his claims up with links or cites. In his "post above" he in
fact does not show that "china's death rate is many times
ours". In response to my request for sources he merely
stated "are you serious? their road death rates are many
times ours". That's it. He's never produced a shred of
actual evidence and shows no sign of ever doing so.

actually by my ruff maff, China's roadtoll isnt that horrendous compared to population (or per head)
China 1.6billion people > roadtoll 100,000 people
Oz 20million(guesstimate) Toll 1300

Their per head figure is only marginally higher than ours, but their car ownership is miniscule compared to ours too!
So look forward to their toll going ahead leaps and bounds, me thinks:rolleyes:
 
>You've missed my point. Shane Stanley has already posted a
>link to what are probably the best statistics on this
>issue. My point is that this ****** "sheik yerbouti" never
>backs his claims up with links or cites. In his "post
>above" he in fact does not show that "china's death rate is
>many times ours". In response to my request for sources he
>merely stated "are you serious? their road death rates are
>many times ours". That's it. He's never produced a shred of
>actual evidence and shows no sign of ever doing so.

from the link that was provided by shane stanley:

reported fatality rates: china - 26.1 australia - 1.8

clearly australia is *far* safer than china, in terms of
road safety.

you say "He's never produced a shred of actual evidence and
shows no sign of ever doing so.", well here it is.

you say " My point is that this ****** "sheik yerbouti"
never backs his claims up with links or cites", well here i
am, backing it up.

now kiss my ****
 
"sheik yerbouti" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
>> You've missed my point. Shane Stanley has already posted
>> a link to what are probably the best statistics on this
>> issue. My point is that this ****** "sheik yerbouti"
>> never backs his claims up with links or cites. In his
>> "post above" he in fact does not show that "china's death
>> rate is many times ours". In response to my request for
>> sources he merely stated "are you serious? their road
>> death rates are many times ours". That's it. He's never
>> produced a shred of actual evidence and shows no sign of
>> ever doing so.
>
> from the link that was provided by shane stanley:
>
> reported fatality rates: china - 26.1 australia - 1.8
>
> clearly australia is *far* safer than china, in terms of
> road safety.
>
> you say "He's never produced a shred of actual evidence
> and shows no sign of ever doing so.", well here it is.
>
> you say " My point is that this ****** "sheik yerbouti"
> never backs his claims up with links or cites", well here
> i am, backing it up.
>
> now kiss my ****

In your dreams. *You* never provided anything but bald
assertions.

--

A: Top-posters.
B: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?
 
Originally posted by Drs

In your dreams. *You* never provided anything but bald
assertions.

[/B]

and yet he's backed it up now, so just kiss (maybe not in the aforementioned way tho :D) and make up!

[AustinPowersVoice]
Yeah baby, yeah
[/AustinPowersVoice]

and for lordy's sake, stop arguing about everything:D
Just ride, darn it

PS what were those new tyres you imported?
 
flyingdutch <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> Blah wrote:
> > Sorry for apologising :)
>
>
>
> stop that!
>
(clears throat, readying for the big punchline)...(slight
pause as anticiaption builds)... "Sorry." (crowd erupts in
laughter and spontaneous applause)
 
On Fri, 28 May 2004 04:50:01 +1000, "DRS"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>>
>> reported fatality rates: china - 26.1 australia - 1.8
>>
>> clearly australia is *far* safer than china, in terms of
>> road safety.
>>
>> you say "He's never produced a shred of actual evidence
>> and shows no sign of ever doing so.", well here it is.
>>
>> you say " My point is that this ****** "sheik yerbouti"
>> never backs his claims up with links or cites", well here
>> i am, backing it up.
>>
>> now kiss my ****
>
>In your dreams. *You* never provided anything but bald
>assertions.

the evidence is staring at you, at the top of this post. are
you blind or just stupid, or both?

you can clearly see that chinese traffic is far less safe
than in australia. do you want it spelled out in a more
simple fashion? what aren't you getting?
 
"flyingdutch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> Drs wrote:
> > In your dreams. *You* never provided anything but bald
> > assertions.
>
> and yet he's backed it up now, so just kiss (maybe not in
> the aforementioned way tho :D) and make up!

Yeah, by using statistics from a link someone else provided.

> [AustinPowersVoice] Yeah baby, yeah [/AustinPowersVoice]
>
> and for lordy's sake, stop arguing about everything:D Just
> ride, darn it

This is Usenet.

> PS what were those new tyres you imported?

Avocet Fasgrip Duro Plus K 700x32.

--

A: Top-posters.
B: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?
 

Similar threads