Lets post the initiative and show me where this was a vote about density.The sad part is you lose the density argument too.You will have a isolated community bereft of significant civic spectacle space and no 24 7 activities.

I represent the honest argument because I am not engaged in sophism to sell gentrification and density while the vote was for regional link.I truly represent linkability,you represent..Greg Smith

Sound transit was sold as a linkable regional link system,then hijacked into a social engineering system that will only serve the socially engineered residents of the utopian socialized mass transit corridor.

Sounder suffers from the same linkability problems beacsue the fact is there will never be cheap affordable parking on these grand boulevards.How many developers are going to capitalize on higher square footage rates with cheap parking investments.

Then you have residential encroachment of 24 7 districts which push out 24 7 activities.Which means you have not centralized a community.Most of these greeny groups that attack me are affiliated with a developer like Greg Smith,that reap the benefits of this misguided social engineering ploy.

My civic spectacle plan would strategically locate the residential housing around civic spectacles and 24 7 districts not loot rail.My plan will centralize a community by making things so good people relocate rather than make things so bad that people relocate.Plus when they relocate they will relocate to centralized comunities.

Loot rail is about setting up a developer to make a fortune and not about anything else.Be real..Where is the 24 7 activity going to be?,where is any significant civic spectacle space going to be?Where is the cheap parking going to be.You wont have it.You wont have a linkable system.You wont have a centralized community.

No developer will do anything except build residential housing on top of limited retail shops that will only stay open until 12 because the socially engineered Ms Cravitz will call the mayors office to complain about the noise.

These are the weaknesses of the grand boulevard theory.You will not have utopia, you will have sophism for developers,and social engineers that have to over look glaring weaknessnes and resort to snobby down your nose attacks.

As to your second point all transportation systems are “socialized” and are a form of “social engineering”. Every transport mode receives massive public subsidies far in excess of any user fees. Every transport mode influences where people live, work, and shop. As for social engineering, I can think of none greater than the personal automobile.

The real nut job is Ben Schiendelman who wants to build utopian socialized mass transit systems and then social engineer people into them.

He tried to go toe to toe with me on the issues but took his ball and went home.
we we we all the way home

The fact that you come to this blog to start heated arguments while providing personal insinuations toward Martin, Ben, and myself significantly colors my judgment of, I’ll accept that. However, you’re smart enough to realize that your actions have consequences. So, yes, I’ve noticed how you’ve treated people here like a belligerent bully would and you’ve received a deserving label from me.

However, the fact that I can recognize that you come here to bully people and create heated arguments has nothing to do with your views on transit. In fact, you’re more pro-transit than not so I hardly view you as on the other side of the spectrum.

I just think that for over a month now you’ve had an extended temper tantrum over something Martin wrote. You’ve expressed yourself in pretty nonconstructive ways at times.

But you have also opened the discussion here toward unique avenues at others. I think you are very self-aware that half the time you post here it’s as a troll and the other half as a concerned suburbanite interested in getting better/any transit to his community. I don’t need to explain this to you.

I just wish you’d drop the trolling/bullying/acting like a jerk part and just realize that though Martin, Ben, me, and nearly every commenter here is flawed at times. All of us are concerned about the future of this region, though, and none of us are passing the buck to someone else to solve its problems.

Because, seriously, I am tired of writing these long comments to respond to throw-away posts that you probably don’t care about the response to as long as it is angry enough.

Correct me if I’m completely misinterpreting your actions. I think you’re honest enough to admit that some pretty heavy trolling has been occurring recently…

That’s not the choice of words I would have used.

Tomorrow’s systems will exploit fast, frequent buses operating on an affordable network of free-flow lanes crisscrossing the region. And also vans, private custom transit now coming to Microsoft, even modern-age jitneys. And probably yet-to-be-seen Web-matched ride sharing. We need to embrace new technology in our transportation vision. Why would we have a plan to spend billions for projects stretching two decades into the future without taking into account that today’s cars, buses and trucks would look like rotary dial phones next to cell phones — figuratively speaking — in comparison to tomorrow’s transportation vehicles?

I don’t see how the discourse is advanced with name-calling.

From Martin the other day: “Although this principle is typically honored in the breach, I ask that commenters refrain from personal attacks and impugning motives of others. Our comment thread is, at best, a very educational exchange of facts, and I hope that we can expand that professional tone.”

Calling people ‘nutjobs’ fits where?
“Jerk” would fit into that line of thinking too.

If you want to be taken seriously, you might consider what I’m pointing out. Just an idea.

Jim Horn is just a plain ‘ole right wing nut.

——
“We believe there are clear transportation choices that will allow us to go where we want to go, how we want to go, and when we want to go,” said Jim Horn, association board chairman and former state Senate Transportation Committee chairman. “We also believe there’s enough tax money proposed to do the job if we simply spend it on the right projects.”

According to Horn, the group’s goal is to bring objectivity to the decision-making process that selects, funds and implements
transportation projects.

“We do not believe we should be spending transportation mega-dollars in an attempt to change human behavior,” Horn said. “We want to spend funds on those parts of a transportation system that support increased efficiency, productivity and our quality of life.”
———

Indeed, Kemper Freeman, Jim Horn, Richard Harkness, Emory Bundy, Don Padelford and several other members of ETA have all been supportive of Personal Rapid Transit over the years. Several of them actually worked on Morgantown’s PRT project for Boeing. A system which was built, had a bunch of technical and budget problems…and has never been expanded in 35 years.

You’re obviously not watching the streaming video, Brad.

Ben called him crazy because….his idea is crazy.

Unless, of course, you deny the existence of crazy people.

They are nutjobs.

Now, folks who speak out because they feel this will congest I-90? They’re just uninformed. That’s okay. They’re not crazy. That’s why I made the distinction.

Crass, yes, but appropriate.

Oh man!

I am getting nervous! Antsy, even!

Executive Sims’ testimony today could set the tone for this election.

Interesting.