If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Americans' love affair with cars starts to skid
Traffic, bad road etiquette - not gas prices - drive many people
off roads A new poll suggests that driving is becoming more of a burden for many Americans and drivers are upset with increasing traffic jams and rude behavior of other motorists. Updated: 7:17 p.m. ET Aug. 1, 2006 WASHINGTON - Americans love their automobiles, but not as much as they used to. Nearly seven in 10 drivers enjoy getting behind the wheel, while the rest think it's a chore. In 1991, nearly eight in 10 said they liked driving. The biggest reasons for dreading the road: traffic and the behavior of other drivers. Only 3 percent point to high gas prices. "Other drivers get on my nerves," said Steve Heavisides, a 45-year-old teacher from Vernon, Conn., who had just returned home from a short drive. "There was a women who could have gone right on red and she was just sitting there talking on her cell phone. People don't pay attention and that gets on your nerves." About one in four drivers thinks of his or her car as "something special" instead of just a "means of transportation," according to a poll released Tuesday by the Pew Research Center. Nearly one in three thinks it has "a personality of its own." Americans have been loving their cars for about a century, buying increasingly bigger, faster and more expensive cars while the rest of the world moves toward economy and efficiency. But the new poll suggests that driving is becoming more of a burden for many. The souring attitudes evolved as many Americans moved farther from central cities, generating longer commutes and more congestion. By 2001, the U.S. had more personal vehicles (204 million) than licensed drivers (191 million). Urban drivers endured an average of 47 hours of rush hour traffic delays in 2003, a threefold increase from two decades earlier. The worst problems were in Los Angeles, where the average driver suffered almost 100 hours of traffic delays. That's about four full days of waiting for the car in front of you to move. "I sit there in traffic when it should take half an hour, now it's taking an hour and 15 minutes," said Stacy Baglio, 36, who drives 28 miles to her sales job in northern New Jersey. "People are weaving in and out of traffic. There is no common courtesy whatsoever." Pew conducted the survey of 1,048 drivers from June 20 to July 16. It has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 4 percentage points. The results were compared with a Gallup poll done in 1991. The new poll's results were consistent among drivers of cars, pickups and SUVs. There were few regional differences among drivers, although northeasterners were more likely than drivers in the rest of the country to have "shouted, cursed or made gestures to other drivers" in the past year. The key to rediscovering automotive bliss: Zen out. Too many people think of driving as competition, says Leon James, co-author of the book, "Road Rage and Aggressive Driving." Happy drivers think of traffic simply as part of the process of getting from one place to another, kind of like the process of taking a shower to get clean, he said. "Americans are nice people," said James, a psychology professor at the University of Hawaii. "But there are certain areas that have to do with games and competition, where we become less nice to each other." Jennifer Geisinger seems to have it figured out. The 31-year-old Realtor from suburban Minneapolis said she loves to drive her 1999 Honda CRV. "It's something about being in control and getting out on the road," Geisinger said. "I don't have a sports car and I don't speed. But I love my car." Geisinger also has something in common with 68 percent of all drivers: "Oh I sing, of course," she said, adding that her stereo plays country, opera and Broadway show tunes. -Sidebar Other findings from poll of 1,048 drivers - 69 percent Americans say they enjoy driving their automobiles, down from 79 percent in 1991. - 68 percent said they have sung out loud in their cars in the past year. - 38 percent said they had "shouted, cursed or made gestures to other drivers" in the past year. Women were just as likely as men to admit the practice. - 6 percent said they had fallen asleep while driving in the past year. - 7 percent said a person's car reveals the most about "what someone is like," compared with 54 percent who said a person's home is most revealing, and 24 percent who cited clothing. - 31 percent said their car has a personality of its own. Reasons people enjoy driving - 21 percent said it's relaxing, quiet time or time to be alone. - 19 percent said they enjoy the scenery or "getting away from things." - 14 percent cited freedom and independence. Reasons people consider driving a chore - 23 percent said traffic and congestion - 14 percent said other drivers, bad drivers or rude drivers - 3 percent said gas prices Source: Pew Research Center http://msnbc.msn.com/id/14137896/ ----- - gpsman |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
The war against the car will never succeed (was: Americans' love affair with cars starts to skid)
The war against the car will never succeed MARGARET WENTE The other day, as I drove to my exercise class (yes, yes, I know there's a contradiction there), people on the radio were telling me to take the TTC. There was a smog alert, and I was contributing to the problem. But it's next to impossible to get to my class by bus, so I drove. "Hah!" said my instructor, the Pilates queen. "You know what TTC means? Take The Car." She's no fan of Toronto's public transit. That's too bad because, according to the politicians and the urban planners, public transit is the answer to all our woes. Everyone knows cars are responsible for everything from gridlock to pollution and obesity. Pry people from their cars, and the world will be a better place. Unfortunately, most people are refusing to co-operate. In 1988, TTC ridership was 463 million, the second largest in North America. By last year, despite the Greater Toronto Area's explosive growth, ridership had shrunk to 410 million. Transit advocates blame higher fares and service cutbacks for this decline. If only we invest more in improving public transit, more people will use it. To a limited extent, this may be true. But transit advocates ignore the overwhelming evidence from around the world: People still prefer their cars. "It may not be the faster way, but public transit remains the better way," The Toronto Star argued this week. New statistics on commuting times reveal what everyone already knows: Public transit is a whole lot slower than driving. People who commute to work by car spend an average of 59 minutes on the road each day (round trip). Transit riders spend 106 minutes. The Star says the answer is massive new investments from all levels of government so public transit can "better compete against the unwholesome lure of the automobile." My own trip to work takes less than 20 minutes by car, but an hour by TTC, much of it standing up. The unwholesome lure of the automobile is darned hard to resist. Southern Ontario is the third-fastest growing region in North America -- in the next 25 years, the population is projected to grow by a staggering four million people. So what's the plan for constructing new road systems and highways? Um, there isn't one. The province plans to re-engineer people's behaviour so they'll take public transit. Last month, Ontario unveiled a new long-range plan to put an end to car-dependent urban sprawl. Higher-density developments will reduce the sprawl, promote more "compact living" and build "complete communities," where people can live, work, shop and play without needing a car. Not only will this plan cut down on smog and gridlock, promises the government, but it will enhance people's sense of community (because they'll be closer together, I guess) as well as improve public health. "Studies tell us that people living in car-dependent communities miss out on natural opportunities for physical activity," declared the minister of infrastructure. "Moreover, they are prone to health problems, such as obesity and heart disease. Our children, in particular, are at much greater risk." In other words, make the little buggers walk. As for Toronto, everyone agrees it should become more like Paris, where people live in higher-density apartment buildings instead of single-family houses, and walk everywhere to do their shopping. There's just one problem: Most Parisians don't live in central Paris any more. Three-quarters of them live in the suburbs, where they can find single-family houses, get around by -- mon Dieu! -- car and shop at -- quelle horreur! -- supermarchs and big-box stores. The idea that people will use public transit to get to work ignores the fact that most people don't want to live near their work. And because people are so mobile, they no longer have to. On top of that, people use their cars for much more than commuting. According to one study, 20 per cent of all trips by auto are for work, 20 per cent for shopping, and 60 per cent for things that are "social." The idea that public transit can replace the car in people's busy lives is a fantasy. As for lower-income people -- supposedly the main beneficiaries of public transit -- they have an alternative, too. It's called used cars. And yet, nowhere in all the hype about the province's new growth plan is there a mention of the words "roads" or "highways." This omission reminds me of the Duke of Wellington's comment about railways, whose construction he opposed because they "only encourage the common people to move about needlessly." Public transit systems are certainly no bargain. "Transit subsidies are hugely greater than any subsidies to the automobile," says Peter Gordon, a California professor of planning and economics. And some people say the cleaner, greener virtues of public transit are vastly overstated. "Most new autos generate little or no more pollution per passenger vehicle mile than the average bus," says Robert Bruegmann, author of Sprawl: A Compact History. He argues it would require a massive increase in the use of public transportation and improvements in transit vehicles to bring about any meaningful reduction in energy use or pollution. Mr. Bruegmann's comments about urban planners' war against sprawl are an apt description of the mindset behind Ontario's new master plan. "Very few people believe that they themselves live in sprawl. Sprawl is where other people live, particularly people with less taste and good sense than themselves. Much anti-sprawl activism is based on a desire to reform these other people's lives." If we really wanted to tackle smog and congestion, we wouldn't be fantasizing about massive new investments in public transit. We'd be investing in transportation infrastructure, less polluting fuels, more intelligent roads and vehicles with sensors to control traffic flows, peak-time user fees and more flexible forms of public and private transport, such as group taxis. But you won't find the planners talking about these things because, to do so, they would have to concede defeat to the unwholesome lure of the automobile -- to say nothing of the overwhelming preference of the public. And that would be very, very wicked. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Americans' love affair with cars starts to skid
gpsman wrote: > Traffic, bad road etiquette - not gas prices - drive many people > off roads > > A new poll suggests that driving is becoming more of a burden for many > Americans and drivers are upset with increasing traffic jams and rude > behavior of other motorists. At least that'll help cut down on excessive use of petroleum products ! Graham |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Americans' love affair with cars starts to skid
gpsman wrote: > Traffic, bad road etiquette - not gas prices - drive many people > off roads Bad road etiquette??? HAHAHAHA. Drivers are psychopaths - that's the way to phrase it. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
The war against the car will never succeed
Ivan wrote:
> My own trip to work takes less > than 20 minutes by car, but an hour by TTC, much of it standing up. The > unwholesome lure of the automobile is darned hard to resist. Assuming an average speed of 30 mph for that trip to work, that results in a distance 10 miles. I can ride my bike that far in about 40 minutes, give or take. Those in better shape with a better bike could make that trip in less than half an hour. But, I'd still drive if the weather was bad, or if it was after sundown. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
The war against the car will never succeed
In article >, Arif Khokar wrote:
> Ivan wrote: >> My own trip to work takes less >> than 20 minutes by car, but an hour by TTC, much of it standing up. The >> unwholesome lure of the automobile is darned hard to resist. > > Assuming an average speed of 30 mph for that trip to work, that results > in a distance 10 miles. I can ride my bike that far in about 40 > minutes, give or take. Those in better shape with a better bike could > make that trip in less than half an hour. You beat to it. The bicycle is a great personal point-to-point on demand vehicle. Anything inside 10 miles is essentially a draw with a car because traffic and signal light timing dominates the trip. (exception if you live in the middle of nowhere and your entire 10 miles is in the middle of nowhere and don't deal with traffic signals every mile to half mile or less) My 9.5 mile ride to work is 35minutes. I can drive a 9 mile route in 25minutes. 5 minutes less coming home for both. Technically I could ride the 9 mile route, but it's rather unpleasant to ride, the first half would be all four lane shoulderless arterial, a good hunk with 60mph+ speeds in a 45mph zone and chaotic flow. The last half would be on a two lane road that is under construction with possibily fatal drop offs, extra narrow lanes and heavy traffic. I take the hills and the .5 penalty of the other route. Not that I haven't ridden similiar to the 9 mile route, I just don't want to do 9 miles of it in one stretch, a mile or two here and there I'll do. It's just unpleasant. > But, I'd still drive if the weather was bad, or if it was after sundown. That reminds me, I need to buy a nice light for the cannondale. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
The war against the car will never succeed (was: Americans' love affair with cars starts to skid)
Ivan wrote: > The war against the car will never succeed > > > MARGARET WENTE > > > The other day, as I drove to my exercise class (yes, yes, I know there's > a contradiction there), people on the radio were telling me to take the > TTC. There was a smog alert, and I was contributing to the problem. But > it's next to impossible to get to my class by bus, so I drove. > > "Hah!" said my instructor, the Pilates queen. "You know what TTC means? > Take The Car." She's no fan of Toronto's public transit. That's too bad > because, according to the politicians and the urban planners, public > transit is the answer to all our woes. Everyone knows cars are > responsible for everything from gridlock to pollution and obesity. Pry > people from their cars, and the world will be a better place. > > Unfortunately, most people are refusing to co-operate. In 1988, TTC > ridership was 463 million, the second largest in North America. By last > year, despite the Greater Toronto Area's explosive growth, ridership had > shrunk to 410 million. > > Transit advocates blame higher fares and service cutbacks for this > decline. If only we invest more in improving public transit, more people > will use it. To a limited extent, this may be true. But transit > advocates ignore the overwhelming evidence from around the world: People > still prefer their cars. > > "It may not be the faster way, but public transit remains the better > way," The Toronto Star argued this week. New statistics on commuting > times reveal what everyone already knows: Public transit is a whole lot > slower than driving. People who commute to work by car spend an average > of 59 minutes on the road each day (round trip). Transit riders spend > 106 minutes. The Star says the answer is massive new investments from > all levels of government so public transit can "better compete against > the unwholesome lure of the automobile." My own trip to work takes less > than 20 minutes by car, but an hour by TTC, much of it standing up. The > unwholesome lure of the automobile is darned hard to resist. > > Southern Ontario is the third-fastest growing region in North America -- > in the next 25 years, the population is projected to grow by a > staggering four million people. So what's the plan for constructing new > road systems and highways? Um, there isn't one. The province plans to > re-engineer people's behaviour so they'll take public transit. > > Last month, Ontario unveiled a new long-range plan to put an end to > car-dependent urban sprawl. Higher-density developments will reduce the > sprawl, promote more "compact living" and build "complete communities," > where people can live, work, shop and play without needing a car. Not > only will this plan cut down on smog and gridlock, promises the > government, but it will enhance people's sense of community (because > they'll be closer together, I guess) as well as improve public health. > > "Studies tell us that people living in car-dependent communities miss > out on natural opportunities for physical activity," declared the > minister of infrastructure. "Moreover, they are prone to health > problems, such as obesity and heart disease. Our children, in > particular, are at much greater risk." In other words, make the little > buggers walk. > > As for Toronto, everyone agrees it should become more like Paris, where > people live in higher-density apartment buildings instead of > single-family houses, and walk everywhere to do their shopping. There's > just one problem: Most Parisians don't live in central Paris any more. > Three-quarters of them live in the suburbs, where they can find > single-family houses, get around by -- mon Dieu! -- car and shop at -- > quelle horreur! -- supermarchs and big-box stores. > > The idea that people will use public transit to get to work ignores the > fact that most people don't want to live near their work. And because > people are so mobile, they no longer have to. On top of that, people use > their cars for much more than commuting. According to one study, 20 per > cent of all trips by auto are for work, 20 per cent for shopping, and 60 > per cent for things that are "social." The idea that public transit can > replace the car in people's busy lives is a fantasy. > > As for lower-income people -- supposedly the main beneficiaries of > public transit -- they have an alternative, too. It's called used cars. > > And yet, nowhere in all the hype about the province's new growth plan is > there a mention of the words "roads" or "highways." This omission > reminds me of the Duke of Wellington's comment about railways, whose > construction he opposed because they "only encourage the common people > to move about needlessly." > > Public transit systems are certainly no bargain. "Transit subsidies are > hugely greater than any subsidies to the automobile," says Peter Gordon, > a California professor of planning and economics. And some people say > the cleaner, greener virtues of public transit are vastly overstated. > "Most new autos generate little or no more pollution per passenger > vehicle mile than the average bus," says Robert Bruegmann, author of > Sprawl: A Compact History. He argues it would require a massive increase > in the use of public transportation and improvements in transit vehicles > to bring about any meaningful reduction in energy use or pollution. > > Mr. Bruegmann's comments about urban planners' war against sprawl are an > apt description of the mindset behind Ontario's new master plan. "Very > few people believe that they themselves live in sprawl. Sprawl is where > other people live, particularly people with less taste and good sense > than themselves. Much anti-sprawl activism is based on a desire to > reform these other people's lives." > > If we really wanted to tackle smog and congestion, we wouldn't be > fantasizing about massive new investments in public transit. We'd be > investing in transportation infrastructure, less polluting fuels, more > intelligent roads and vehicles with sensors to control traffic flows, > peak-time user fees and more flexible forms of public and private > transport, such as group taxis. But you won't find the planners talking > about these things because, to do so, they would have to concede defeat > to the unwholesome lure of the automobile -- to say nothing of the > overwhelming preference of the public. And that would be very, very > wicked. > > mwente@globeandmail. Ivan, why did you post your drivel here about Canada? Last time I checked this is an American Newsgroup. Google groups is an American entity. Made by Americans, and owned and opererated by Americans. Your post belongs in the Canadian Newsgroup. The one thing that I don't like about Canada is the currency. With Queen Elizabeth II on every coin and ever paper bill. It's disgusting. Independence is too important!!! East- |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Americans' love affair with cars starts to skid
In article .com>,
gpsman > wrote: >Traffic, bad road etiquette - not gas prices - drive many people >off roads If it really did, we'd get rid of the traffic in short order. >Nearly seven in 10 drivers enjoy getting behind the wheel, while the >rest think it's a chore. In 1991, nearly eight in 10 said they liked >driving. It's the aging of America; it's turning the US into a country of Nervous Nellie types. -- There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can result in a fully-depreciated one. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Survey: Movie and TV cars auto enthusiasts love the most | Grover C. McCoury III | Ford Mustang | 2 | June 8th 05 04:15 AM |
thinking about buying a temporary car | Magnulus | Driving | 144 | March 8th 05 04:40 PM |
Drving faster, in my experience does not make a significant change in mileage... | Cory Dunkle | Driving | 118 | February 4th 05 03:00 PM |
Vintage Cars Get Hot with Makeovers | Grover C. McCoury III | Ford Mustang | 2 | December 5th 04 04:13 AM |
European Cars Least Reliable | Richard Schulman | VW water cooled | 3 | November 11th 04 09:41 AM |