harryopal1
I am reminded of this adage, Man proposes, God disposes, after reading this morning about an enormous cock up in Sydney with traffic planning. $3.9 billion has been spent on a new tunnel system approaching Sydney Harbour Bridge and Circular Key. The project was opened last week with a great, self congratulatory claim about how this wonderful asset was going to result in a fantastic improvement in traffic flow. Instead it has led to impossible traffic jams and one person stating their 15 minutes trip now takes 90 minutes. At a public meeting yesterday the Transport Coordinator said they now understood just how bad the situation has become but it could not be improved into 2028. You can imagine how well that went down at the public meeting. Here's a link to the story if of interest. [URL]https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-12-08/nsw-rozelle-interchange-meeting-transport-sydney/103202868[/URL]It seems as cities get bigger and bigger, traffic gets worse, opportunities open up for project creators to make heaps of money with fabulously expensive projects. This seems to happen at a major level and local level. With Christmas and the busiest season at hand for the warungs at the southern end of Jimbaran beach it has suddenly been decided to repair the jalur that runs adjacent to the beach. Visited the area yesterday and find it hard to imagine that this can be completed before Christmas.[ATTACH type="full" alt="1702004358530.png"]3921[/ATTACH]
Foamcrest
What an amazing , colossal stuff up! After years and years of planning, hundreds of 'experts' pouring over detailed plans, billions and billions of dollars spent and on the VERY FIRST DAY its chaos. Naturally it was none of the 'experts' fault. The drivers were to blame for using the wrong exit. No worries, just another few billion and some more experts we'll widen Anzac bridge.Thank goodness it didn't happen in Bali otherwise we'd have people complaining about 3rd world country stuff ups again.
YachtRock
I am reminded of this adage, Man proposes, God disposes, after reading this morning about an enormous cock up in Sydney with traffic planning. $3.9 billion has been spent on a new tunnel system approaching Sydney Harbour Bridge and Circular Key. The project was opened last week with a great, self congratulatory claim about how this wonderful asset was going to result in a fantastic improvement in traffic flow. Instead it has led to impossible traffic jams and one person stating their 15 minutes trip now takes 90 minutes. At a public meeting yesterday the Transport Coordinator said they now understood just how bad the situation has become but it could not be improved into 2028. You can imagine how well that went down at the public meeting. Here's a link to the story if of interest. [URL]https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-12-08/nsw-rozelle-interchange-meeting-transport-sydney/103202868[/URL]It seems as cities get bigger and bigger, traffic gets worse, opportunities open up for project creators to make heaps of money with fabulously expensive projects. This seems to happen at a major level and local level. With Christmas and the busiest season at hand for the warungs at the southern end of Jimbaran beach it has suddenly been decided to repair the jalur that runs adjacent to the beach. Visited the area yesterday and find it hard to imagine that this can be completed before Christmas.[ATTACH=full]3921[/ATTACH][/QUOTE]I'm from Boston originally. Maybe you heard of the infamous "Big Dig" project we did over there. Same concept. Dig tunnels under the city to alleviate traffic. All these years later, the traffic is worse than ever.Like you said, all these infrastructure "improvements" is a money grab. The only real way to reduce traffic is to reduce the amount of cars on the road. Since I don't see that happening anytime soon, looks like it's only going to get worse from here.
Markit
Back in the 50s they ripped up the tramlines in most American large cities and introduced "cost saving" diesel buses. Care to guess which company was in charge of that demolition? General Motors.
harryopal1
Back in the 50s they ripped up the tramlines in most American large cities and introduced "cost saving" diesel buses. Care to guess which company was in charge of that demolition? General Motors.[/QUOTE]Through the first half of the 20th century Los Angeles had one of the best public transport systems in the world with an electric street car network. Then a company named National City Lines formed to shape future transport for Los Angeles Now it is just a maze of multi lane fly overs, cross unders and the city has one of the worst pollution ratings in the US. Ohh by the way, the companies which formed National City Lines included General Motors, the Firestone Tire and Rubber Company, Standard Oil of California, Phillips Petroleum, Mack Trucks, and other companies who stood to benefit from getting rid of the electrified public transport system.[ATTACH type="full"]3928[/ATTACH]
YachtRock
Through the first half of the 20th century Los Angeles had one of the best public transport systems in the world with an electric street car network. Then a company named National City Lines formed to shape future transport for Los Angeles Now it is just a maze of multi lane fly overs, cross unders and the city has one of the worst pollution ratings in the US.Ohh by the way, the companies which formed National City Lines included General Motors, the Firestone Tire and Rubber Company, Standard Oil of California, Phillips Petroleum, Mack Trucks, and other companies who stood to benefit from getting rid of the electrified public transport system.[ATTACH=full]3928[/ATTACH][/QUOTE]Interesting theory but it's been proven false:"There's this widespread conspiracy theory that the streetcars were bought up by a company [URL='http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_City_Lines']National City Lines[/URL], which was effectively controlled by GM, so that they could be torn up and converted into bus lines," says [URL='http://www.planetizen.com/taxonomy/term/26120']Peter Norton[/URL], a historian at the University of Virginia and author of [URL='http://mitpress.mit.edu/books/fighting-traffic'][I]Fighting Traffic: The Dawn of the Motor Age in the American City.[/I][/URL]But that's not the full story, he says. "By the time National City Lines bought up these streetcar companies, they were already bankrupt.""The real reasons for the streetcar's demise are much less nefarious than a GM-driven conspiracy - they include gridlock and city rules that kept fares artificially low - but they're fascinating in their own right, and if you're a transit fan, they're even more frustrating," writes Stromberg.The real problem was that once cars appeared on the road, they could drive on streetcar tracks - and the streetcars could no longer operate efficiently. "Once just 10 percent or so of people were driving, the tracks were so crowded that [the streetcars] weren't making their schedules," Norton says. While it's true that National City continued ripping up lines and replacing them with buses - and that, long-term, GM benefited from the decline of mass transit - it's tough to argue that National City killed the streetcar on its own. Streetcar systems went bankrupt and were dismantled in virtually every metro area in the United States, and National City was only involved in about 10 percent of cases.
harryopal1
Interesting theory but it's been proven false:"There's this widespread conspiracy theory that the streetcars were bought up by a company [URL='http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_City_Lines']National City Lines[/URL], which was effectively controlled by GM, so that they could be torn up and converted into bus lines," says [URL='http://www.planetizen.com/taxonomy/term/26120']Peter Norton[/URL], a historian at the University of Virginia and author of [URL='http://mitpress.mit.edu/books/fighting-traffic'][I]Fighting Traffic: The Dawn of the Motor Age in the American City.[/I][/URL]But that's not the full story, he says. "By the time National City Lines bought up these streetcar companies, they were already bankrupt.""The real reasons for the streetcar's demise are much less nefarious than a GM-driven conspiracy - they include gridlock and city rules that kept fares artificially low - but they're fascinating in their own right, and if you're a transit fan, they're even more frustrating," writes Stromberg.The real problem was that once cars appeared on the road, they could drive on streetcar tracks - and the streetcars could no longer operate efficiently. "Once just 10 percent or so of people were driving, the tracks were so crowded that [the streetcars] weren't making their schedules," Norton says. While it's true that National City continued ripping up lines and replacing them with buses - and that, long-term, GM benefited from the decline of mass transit - it's tough to argue that National City killed the streetcar on its own. Streetcar systems went bankrupt and were dismantled in virtually every metro area in the United States, and National City was only involved in about 10 percent of cases.[/QUOTE]Throughout that process across the US, whatever the intricacies of change, I daresay the various companies previously mentioned were lobbying hard in their own interests without regard for public transport. Sydney used to have trams. Melbourne still has them and it is wonderful system being affordable, comfortable and usually reliable.[ATTACH type="full"]3932[/ATTACH] Earlier trams.[ATTACH type="full"]3933[/ATTACH] New trams
YachtRock
Throughout that process across the US, whatever the intricacies of change, I daresay the various companies previously mentioned were lobbying hard in their own interests without regard for public transport. Sydney used to have trams. Melbourne still has them and it is wonderful system being affordable, comfortable and usually reliable.[ATTACH=full]3932[/ATTACH] Earlier trams.[ATTACH=full]3933[/ATTACH] New trams[/QUOTE]Yes, there were certainly those lobbying in favor of their best interests but the explosion of automobile use was a huge factor as well. Both can be true but to blame it all on a giant conspiracy to get rid of trams in favor of fossil-fuel-burning cars is just not the fact.As for Melbourne, that situation is the most unique in the entire world. There is a great research paper on why Melbourne trains survived. Here's an excerpt:"Melbourne's tramway system survived through the 1950s and 1960s for several key reasons, all peculiar to Melbourne. In Major General Risson they had a strong and adept political leader/administrator. The RACV was a much more demure motoring organisation than the NRMA in Sydney, much less aggressive in its attacks on trams. And Melbourne, with its generous street layouts, had many more tram 'rights of way' than any other Australian city (See Broomham, 1996 and Priestly 1983 on the respective cultures of the NRMA and the RACV)."[URL='http://Melbourne's tramway system survived through the 1950s and 1960s for a number of key reasons, all peculiar to Melbourne. In Major General Risson they had a strong and adept political adept leader/administrator. The RACV was a much more demure motoring organisation than the NRMA in Sydney, much less aggressive in its attacks on trams. And Melbourne, with its generous street layouts, had many more tram 'rights of way' than any other Australian city (See Broomham, 1996 and Priestly 1983 on the respective cultures of the NRMA and the RACV).']Source[/URL]
harryopal1
There was a restaurant tram which was very popular as you toured Melbourne for two hours during meals but it was withdrawn in 2018 for safety reasons."Painted in traditional burgundy and fitted out in velvet and brass like the luxurious Pullman-style European trains of the past.[RIGHT]http://cache.graphicslib.viator.com/graphicslib/3412/SITours/colonial-tramcar-restaurant-tour-of-melbourne-in-melbourne-1.jpg[/IMG][/RIGHT]You have a choice between first class Lunch, Early Dinner, or Late Dinner. Lunch is 4-course meal, Early Dinner a 3-course meal departing at 6:45pm, and Late Dinner and a 5-course meal, departing at 8:35pm. All meals include drinks and coffee.The service is great and entertaining, the food delicious and made from fresh local produce prepared onboard the tram.
Markit
Interesting theory but it's been proven false:"There's this widespread conspiracy theory that the streetcars were bought up by a company [URL='http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_City_Lines']National City Lines[/URL], which was effectively controlled by GM, so that they could be torn up and converted into bus lines," says [URL='http://www.planetizen.com/taxonomy/term/26120']Peter Norton[/URL], a historian at the University of Virginia and author of [URL='http://mitpress.mit.edu/books/fighting-traffic'][I]Fighting Traffic: The Dawn of the Motor Age in the American City.[/I][/URL]But that's not the full story, he says. "By the time National City Lines bought up these streetcar companies, they were already bankrupt.""The real reasons for the streetcar's demise are much less nefarious than a GM-driven conspiracy - they include gridlock and city rules that kept fares artificially low - but they're fascinating in their own right, and if you're a transit fan, they're even more frustrating," writes Stromberg.The real problem was that once cars appeared on the road, they could drive on streetcar tracks - and the streetcars could no longer operate efficiently. "Once just 10 percent or so of people were driving, the tracks were so crowded that [the streetcars] weren't making their schedules," Norton says. While it's true that National City continued ripping up lines and replacing them with buses - and that, long-term, GM benefited from the decline of mass transit - it's tough to argue that National City killed the streetcar on its own. Streetcar systems went bankrupt and were dismantled in virtually every metro area in the United States, and National City was only involved in about 10 percent of cases.[/QUOTE]Please remember that the victors get to write the history. Funnily in the last 60 or so years I really can't think of a "conspiracy theory" that hasn't eventually turned out to be true, at least in the main. Bay of PigsKennedyKennedyMLKBay of TonkinCatholic ChurchUFOsGerman diesel carsetc, etc, etc, ad infinitum....
harryopal1
Interesting theory but it's been proven false:......But that's not the full story, he says. "By the time National City Lines bought up these streetcar companies, they were already bankrupt.""The real reasons for the streetcar's demise are much less nefarious than a GM-driven conspiracy - they include gridlock and city rules that kept fares artificially low - but they're fascinating in their own right, and if you're a transit fan, they're even more frustrating," writes Stromberg.The real problem was that once cars appeared on the road, they could drive on streetcar tracks - and the streetcars could no longer operate efficiently. "Once just 10 percent or so of people were driving, the tracks were so crowded that [the streetcars] weren't making their schedules," Norton says........[/QUOTE]I am not persuaded that the formation of the National City Lines involving all those with vested interest in the use of cars rather than public transport was not what might reasonably be termed a conspiracy. Even had the street car companies been already been bankrupt it seems probable that the vested car interests were determined to ensure that public transport possibilities were not resuscitated. I haven't read Peter Norton's book. If he had access to all of the meeting notes of the National City Lines he may have developed his argument quite fairly. On the other hand most conspiracies take care to avoid keeping noted details of their intentions. Ever since commercial lobbying began, and until the present day, most lobbyists are in their fighting hard to get their interests protected even if to the detriment of public welfare. The history of the tobacco industry in concealing the known health threats of smoking while continuing with the lie that smoking is not dangerous to public health is a strong example of the way many conspiracies against public interest are developed.[ATTACH type="full" alt="1702695395236.png"]3939[/ATTACH]
YachtRock
Please remember that the victors get to write the history.Funnily in the last 60 or so years I really can't think of a "conspiracy theory" that hasn't eventually turned out to be true, at least in the main.Bay of PigsKennedyKennedyMLKBay of TonkinCatholic ChurchUFOsGerman diesel carsetc, etc, etc, ad infinitum....[/QUOTE]Do you want to add the Holocaust, 9/11, Jews controlling the weather, the New World Order, The Illuminati and COVID-19 to that list too? I think you are jumping the gun a bit. Sure, some conspiracy theories are proven true just as there are scientific theories that are proven true. That's why they are called theories at first and once enough evidence comes forward, it is no longer a theory but fact. But to say every conspiracy theory comes true is just incorrect. Most of them are just plain rubbish - though they are certainly fun to entertain.
YachtRock
I am not persuaded that the formation of the National City Lines involving all those with vested interest in the use of cars rather than public transport was not what might reasonably be termed a conspiracy. Even had the street car companies been already been bankrupt it seems probable that the vested car interests were determined to ensure that public transport possibilities were not resuscitated. I haven't read Peter Norton's book. If he had access to all of the meeting notes of the National City Lines he may have developed his argument quite fairly. On the other hand most conspiracies take care to avoid keeping noted details of their intentions. Ever since commercial lobbying began, and until the present day, most lobbyists are in their fighting hard to get their interests protected even if to the detriment of public welfare. The history of the tobacco industry in concealing the known health threats of smoking while continuing with the lie that smoking is not dangerous to public health is a strong example of the way many conspiracies against public interest are developed.[ATTACH type="full" alt="1702695395236.png"]3939[/ATTACH][/QUOTE]The tobacco industry thing is not a conspiracy theory. That's a proven fact and businesses still do that type of behavior today. It's an absolute scum bag thing to do to sell more products but that's what we humans are made of. We suck. But going back to our tram debate, again, I am not denying that oil companies were lobbying for the destruction of the trams. However, there is plenty of evidence supporting that it wasn't the sole cause. I just don't believe the big oil companies got together and schemed how to take down the tram lines in some elaborate conspiracy. However, I do believe they saw some competition arising between trams and cars and they used that opportune moment to attack for their own financial interests. That worked which is why the US is still a car-centric nation to this day.
Markit
Do you want to add the Holocaust, 9/11, Jews controlling the weather, the New World Order, The Illuminati and COVID-19 to that list too? I think you are jumping the gun a bit. Sure, some conspiracy theories are proven true just as there are scientific theories that are proven true. That's why they are called theories at first and once enough evidence comes forward, it is no longer a theory but fact.But to say every conspiracy theory comes true is just incorrect. Most of them are just plain rubbish - though they are certainly fun to entertain.[/QUOTE]The Holocaust was a conspiracy theory? I did say 60 years and for the rest the judgement is still out on those being valid or garbage. Frankly I could make a fist arguing about all your examples being in part true with evidence if you want...
YachtRock
The Holocaust was a conspiracy theory? I did say 60 years and for the rest the judgement is still out on those being valid or garbage. Frankly I could make a fist arguing about all your examples being in part true with evidence if you want...[/QUOTE]Yeah, you haven't heard about that one? Holocaust deniers are gaining a lot of traction these days. Same with the Flat Earth crowd. While I would appreciate reading your attempts to try to prove all these theories right, I think it's better we save this for a night when we are both drowning in Bintangs. That way we can justify the stupidity of such a conversation
harryopal1
The tobacco industry thing is not a conspiracy theory. That's a proven fact and businesses still do that type of behavior today. It's an absolute scum bag thing to do to sell more products but that's what we humans are made of. We suck.But going back to our tram debate, again, I am not denying that oil companies were lobbying for the destruction of the trams. However, there is plenty of evidence supporting that it wasn't the sole cause. I just don't believe the big oil companies got together and schemed how to take down the tram lines in some elaborate conspiracy. However, I do believe they saw some competition arising between trams and cars and they used that opportune moment to attack for their own financial interests. That worked which is why the US is still a car-centric nation to this day.[/QUOTE]The nefarious activities of the tobacco industry are now proven facts. But for a long time the industry conspired to keep secret the knowledge that was known to them about smoking and their deliberately adding chemicals to cause addiction. Not unlike the Asbestos industry where for many years the dangers of inhaling asbestos dust was known to management but they continued to employ miners in hazardous conditions and sell product to the building industry. In Australia when they were busted, so to speak, the major asbestos company conspired to move their management and financial structures off shore so that when reparation was being pressed for the hundreds of mortally diseased miners there was just a small amount left, nowhere near enough, for compensation payments. I don't know about "elaborate conspiracy" of the big oil and car manufacturing companies to take down the tram lines but we are at least in agreement that the members of the National City Lines were doing their best to promote car usage and not eager to promote public interest by trying to maintain public transport.
Markit
The nefarious activities of the tobacco industry are now proven facts. But for a long time the industry conspired to keep secret the knowledge that was known to them about smoking and their deliberately adding chemicals to cause addiction. Not unlike the Asbestos industry where for many years the dangers of inhaling asbestos dust was known to management but they continued to employ miners in hazardous conditions and sell product to the building industry. In Australia when they were busted, so to speak, the major asbestos company conspired to move their management and financial structures off shore so that when reparation was being pressed for the hundreds of mortally diseased miners there was just a small amount left, nowhere near enough, for compensation payments.I don't know about "elaborate conspiracy" of the big oil and car manufacturing companies to take down the tram lines but we are at least in agreement that the members of the National City Lines were doing their best to promote car usage and not eager to promote public interest by trying to maintain public transport.[/QUOTE]That you've found some conspiracy theories that are patently batshit crazy and are clearly untrue is simply a measure of my sheltered upbringing and your American source material. Isn't it strange how all this madness comes from the one place?!
Markit
Sry the previous was an answer to the wrong posting - MANAGEMENT I got the OOPs message when trying to delete it FYI
Shadrach
I am reminded of this adage, Man proposes, God disposes, after reading this morning about an enormous cock up in Sydney with traffic planning. $3.9 billion has been spent on a new tunnel system approaching Sydney Harbour Bridge and Circular Key. The project was opened last week with a great, self congratulatory claim about how this wonderful asset was going to result in a fantastic improvement in traffic flow. Instead it has led to impossible traffic jams and one person stating their 15 minutes trip now takes 90 minutes. At a public meeting yesterday the Transport Coordinator said they now understood just how bad the situation has become but it could not be improved into 2028. You can imagine how well that went down at the public meeting. Here's a link to the story if of interest. [URL]https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-12-08/nsw-rozelle-interchange-meeting-transport-sydney/103202868[/URL]It seems as cities get bigger and bigger, traffic gets worse, opportunities open up for project creators to make heaps of money with fabulously expensive projects. This seems to happen at a major level and local level. With Christmas and the busiest season at hand for the warungs at the southern end of Jimbaran beach it has suddenly been decided to repair the jalur that runs adjacent to the beach. Visited the area yesterday and find it hard to imagine that this can be completed before Christmas.[ATTACH type="full" alt="1702004358530.png"]3921[/ATTACH],[/QUOTE]Hi Harryopal, what a tragedy for the people that live there. 4 years to correct the problem! I have never understood why people live in cities or why they were created. Everyone all crammed on top of each other. The water and sewage pipes next to each other, The water chlorinated, Smog.major crime, homelessness, tons of drugs! When I see photos of cities I am always amazed how horrible they look and that people want to live there. Oh, What a rat race! No thanks for me. I would much prefer the countryside!
YachtRock
Hi Harryopal, what a tragedy for the people that live there. 4 years to correct the problem! I have never understood why people live in cities or why they were created. Everyone all crammed on top of each other. The water and sewage pipes next to each other, The water chlorinated, Smog.major crime, homelessness, tons of drugs! When I see photos of cities I am always amazed how horrible they look and that people want to live there. Oh, What a rat race! No thanks for me. I would much prefer the countryside![/QUOTE]It's pretty simple really. People are attracted to cities due to the various public transport options (in most cities), a mix of cultures, job opportunities, and easy access to shops, amenities, and entertainment. I agree with you, city life is not for me, but I can see the appeal.
