On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 09:52:17PM -0000, Jim Millen <J.Millen-99 at student.lboro.ac.uk> wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 09:26:39PM -0000, Jim Millen > > <J.Millen-99 at student.lboro.ac.uk> wrote: > > > Making generalisations about a nation of - umm.. 290 > > million, is it? - > > > isn't going to be at all conclusive, I know, and I'm sure there are > > > some people over there who do drive smaller, more > > fuel-efficient cars. > > > But it's hard to escape the conclusion that the US could > > significantly > > > cut its fuel demands if there were fewer 3 or 4 litre cars on the > > > roads. > > > I mean, do people find the idea of having to spend less money to go > > > the same distance unattractive, or something? > > Aside from being off-topic, this is a common misconception. It > > may be cost-effective in Europe, where cities were designed > > differently, but in the US, it just doesn't work that way. > http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110006428 > Did you mean to reply to my message there? I wasn't arguing in favour > of mass transit systems, but in favour of more economical motor > vehicles. Sorry; on a closer reading you were talking more about smaller / more efficient cars. It wasn't clear on a cursory skim, since several people upthread were talking about public transit. > It is off-topic though. Sorry. No worries ;) -- Homepage: http://matthew.infodancer.org/ Politics: http://triggerfinger.org/ Literature: http://speculativefiction.org/ Public Key: http://matthew.infodancer.org/public_key.txt