Many Birds with One Stone
 

"Gawnsoft" wrote in
message ...
On Sat, 7 Aug 2004 16:36:17 -0500, "Stephen Sprunk"
The cost of drivers will destroy any savings the taxibuses have over
other
modes,

Surely not over taxis.


Taxis aren't mass transport, they are a way rich people can get arround
easilly using lanes designed for mass transit (busses)
--
Everything above is the personal opinion of the author, and nothing to do
with where he works and all that lovely disclaimery stuff.
Posted in his lunch hour too.

Many Birds with One Stone
 

In message , at 09:52:03 on Tue, 10
Aug 2004, Paul Weaver remarked:
Taxis aren't mass transport, they are a way rich people can get arround
easilly using lanes designed for mass transit (busses)

Taxis are mass transport because during a day a large number of people
get to use the same vehicle, which is already inside the central area.

It is worth encouraging this, as the alternative is to cope with
(including the manufacturing environmental costs) dozens of individual
vehicles, each making its way through the suburbs.
--
Roland Perry

Many Birds with One Stone
 

"Paul Weaver" wrote in message
...
"Gawnsoft" wrote in
message ...
On Sat, 7 Aug 2004 16:36:17 -0500, "Stephen Sprunk"
The cost of drivers will destroy any savings the taxibuses have over
other modes,

Surely not over taxis.

Taxis aren't mass transport,

I hadn't considered taxis a form of transit since, when the driver is
excluded, they have a load factor similar to private cars.

they are a way rich people can get arround easilly using lanes designed
for
mass transit (busses)

In some cities, perhaps. Being able to use HOV lanes is a minor benefit
compared to the cost. Whining about how they're only used by "the rich" is
gratuitously inflammatory and adds nothing to the debate; in fact they're
only marginally more expensive than owning and operating your own car if you
live in a dense urban area. For a business traveler (who I suppose you
assume are all "rich"), taxis are often significantly cheaper than a rental
car, especially when combined with transit.

S

--
Stephen Sprunk "Those people who think they know everything
CCIE #3723 are a great annoyance to those of us who do."
K5SSS --Isaac Asimov

Many Birds with One Stone
 

Stephen Sprunk ) gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying :

I hadn't considered taxis a form of transit since, when the driver is
excluded, they have a load factor similar to private cars.

Not to mention all the single-occupant cruising around looking for a fare
when a private car would be parked.

Many Birds with One Stone
 

Paul Weaver wrote:

"Gawnsoft" wrote:

"Stephen Sprunk"

The cost of drivers will destroy any savings the taxibuses have
over other modes,

Surely not over taxis.

Taxis aren't mass transport,

Correct.

they are a way rich people can get
arround easilly using lanes designed for mass transit (busses)

Very incorrect.

The large number of taxis in provincial cities (I cite Liverpool in
particular, with over 1500 licensed taxis) could not be sustained if
patronised only by "rich" people (who, in places outside London, encounter
far less restriction on car-use anyway, and are to be found in very small
numbers).

Taxi-riders in the UK (maybe not in the West End, Kensington or the square
mile of the City) are overwhelmingly members of the working and middle
classes, perhaps even of the underclass - certainly not "the rich".


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.734 / Virus Database: 488 - Release Date: 04/08/04

Many Birds with One Stone
 

Paul Weaver wrote:
"Brimstone" wrote in message
...
chris harrison wrote:
Brimstone wrote:

Adrian wrote:

Stephen Sprunk ) gurgled happily, sounding much
like they were saying :


I hadn't considered taxis a form of transit since, when the
driver is excluded, they have a load factor similar to private
cars.

Not to mention all the single-occupant cruising around looking
for a fare when a private car would be parked.


Occupying space that could be economically active?



As opposed to being parked somewhere waiting for the single-occupant
to pick it up later?

Sorry, I was meaning that the space occupied by the unused car could
be economically active, i.e. retail, commercial or industrial
premises or even housing.

Assuming parked on private land, that's none of your business what
it's used for, yes it could be another estate agent, or it could be a
park, but it's not your choice, unlike roads that space is owned and
the owner will do what they want with it.

I don't recall making any suggestion that land use is my business. Would you
care to refresh my memory?

Many Birds with One Stone
 

Gawnsoft wrote:
On Tue, 10 Aug 2004 09:52:03 +0100, "Paul Weaver"
wrote (more or less):

"Gawnsoft" wrote
in message ...
On Sat, 7 Aug 2004 16:36:17 -0500, "Stephen Sprunk"
The cost of drivers will destroy any savings the taxibuses have
over other modes,

Surely not over taxis.


Taxis aren't mass transport, they are a way rich people can get
arround easilly using lanes designed for mass transit (busses)

In my experience, taxi's are often used by those who cannot afford to
run a car.

Surely those who choose not to run a car will also use taxis?

I realise that a small number of people find it difficult to believe, but
there are actually people in the UK who exercise their choice and don't
drive. They choose to use public transport to get about.


This also varies from place to place, I expect. Certainly Glasgow
taxis are almost an order of magnitude cheaper than Edinburgh taxis,
for example.

Many Birds with One Stone
 

In message , at 23:37:39 on
Tue, 10 Aug 2004, Gawnsoft
remarked:
Most people going to dixons to buy a new TV aren't going to want to
take it home on the bus.

True. Luckily many such shops have delivery vans. It's certainly how
I get lots of my purchases to my home from the shops.

So instead of getting the whatever that you carefully picked out in
the shop, at home and useful that afternoon; you get to take a day off
work, and wait in all of next Thursday, in the hope that the one they
deliver from the warehouse doesn't have a big scratch on the side.
--
Roland Perry

Many Birds with One Stone
 

Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 23:37:39
on Tue, 10 Aug 2004, Gawnsoft
remarked:
Most people going to dixons to buy a new TV aren't going to want to
take it home on the bus.

True. Luckily many such shops have delivery vans. It's certainly
how I get lots of my purchases to my home from the shops.

So instead of getting the whatever that you carefully picked out in
the shop, at home and useful that afternoon; you get to take a day off
work, and wait in all of next Thursday, in the hope that the one they
deliver from the warehouse doesn't have a big scratch on the side.

So you pay out the costs of owning a car so that you can go a buy a new TV
and carry it home yourself every few years? An interesting slant on
cost/benefit analysis.

Many Birds with One Stone
 

In message , at 10:17:02 on Wed, 11
Aug 2004, Brimstone remarked:
So you pay out the costs of owning a car so that you can go a buy a new TV
and carry it home yourself every few years? An interesting slant on
cost/benefit analysis.

Only on Usenet do you find propositions like this taken to such
ridiculous extremes.

What's actually happening is that over the period of ownership of the
car, people find *enough* times they need to transport something large,
or go somewhere inconvenient for public transport, or travel at hours
that public transport doesn't work, or on routes that PT fail to
support.
--
Roland Perry

Many Birds with One Stone
 

Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 10:17:02 on Wed,
11 Aug 2004, Brimstone remarked:
So you pay out the costs of owning a car so that you can go a buy a
new TV and carry it home yourself every few years? An interesting
slant on cost/benefit analysis.

Only on Usenet do you find propositions like this taken to such
ridiculous extremes.

Oh I dunno, I've heard people pick up on a minor point or put a different
slant on a comment in lots of other places quite apart from Usenet. A little
of it intended seriously, much of it not.


What's actually happening is that over the period of ownership of the
car, people find *enough* times they need to transport something
large,
or go somewhere inconvenient for public transport, or travel at hours
that public transport doesn't work, or on routes that PT fail to
support.

Many Birds with One Stone
 

On Wed, 11 Aug 2004 at 09:44:52, Roland Perry
wrote:

In message , at
23:37:39 on Tue, 10 Aug 2004, Gawnsoft
move.this.antispam.net remarked:
Most people going to dixons to buy a new TV aren't going to want to
take it home on the bus.

True. Luckily many such shops have delivery vans. It's certainly how
I get lots of my purchases to my home from the shops.

So instead of getting the whatever that you carefully picked out in
the shop, at home and useful that afternoon; you get to take a day off
work, and wait in all of next Thursday, in the hope that the one they
deliver from the warehouse doesn't have a big scratch on the side.

So if you'd rather not wait in for the whatever, assuming (big
assumption) that they have one in stock other than the display model,
which they probably won't have, but *if* they do, what's wrong with
hiring a van for the afternoon?

Last time I bought a telly, I brought it home in a taxi. Time before,
we managed with the car, even though the street that particular shop was
in was not only no parking, it was pedestrianised!
--
Annabel Smyth
http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/index.html
Website updated 7 August 2004 - for a limited time, be bored by my holiday
snaps!

Many Birds with One Stone
 

On Wed, 11 Aug 2004 at 11:31:59, Roland Perry
wrote:

What's actually happening is that over the period of ownership of the
car, people find *enough* times they need to transport something large,
or go somewhere inconvenient for public transport, or travel at hours
that public transport doesn't work, or on routes that PT fail to support.

Oh, I dunno - our car spends most of its life in the garage; we really
only keep it because we tend to take motoring holidays. And it gets
used on Sundays and one Wednesday a month. Other than that, in a normal
month, it lives in the garage.
--
Annabel Smyth
http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/index.html
Website updated 7 August 2004 - for a limited time, be bored by my holiday
snaps!

Many Birds with One Stone
 

On Tue, 10 Aug 2004 at 23:35:55, Gawnsoft
wrote:

Have you figures to back this up? In my experience, taxi's are often
used for multiple occupancy, whereas most car journeys are
single-occupant.

Taxi's what? Which taxi, and what belongs to it? I'm afraid your post
makes no sense, as written.
--
Annabel Smyth
http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/index.html
Website updated 7 August 2004 - for a limited time, be bored by my holiday
snaps!

Many Birds with One Stone
 

In message , at 12:38:45 on Wed,
11 Aug 2004, Annabel Smyth remarked:
What's actually happening is that over the period of ownership of the
car, people find *enough* times they need to transport something large,
or go somewhere inconvenient for public transport, or travel at hours
that public transport doesn't work, or on routes that PT fail to support.

Oh, I dunno - our car spends most of its life in the garage; we really
only keep it because we tend to take motoring holidays. And it gets
used on Sundays and one Wednesday a month. Other than that, in a normal
month, it lives in the garage.

Well, that's obviously *enough* usage for you, then. Odd how it varies
from person to person. PT's big drawback is assuming one size fits all.
--
Roland Perry

Many Birds with One Stone
 

In message , at 12:37:36 on Wed,
11 Aug 2004, Annabel Smyth remarked:
So if you'd rather not wait in for the whatever, assuming (big
assumption) that they have one in stock other than the display model,
which they probably won't have, but *if* they do, what's wrong with
hiring a van for the afternoon?

Because the van hire company is the other side of town, and they might
not have a suitable vehicle at short notice. And you have the problem of
storing the items at the shop while you go and fetch the van. And then
taking the van back. All extremely tedious.
--
Roland Perry

Many Birds with One Stone
 

On Wed, 11 Aug 2004 at 13:02:00, Roland Perry
wrote:

In message , at
12:37:36 on Wed, 11 Aug 2004, Annabel Smyth
mon.co.uk remarked:
So if you'd rather not wait in for the whatever, assuming (big
assumption) that they have one in stock other than the display model,
which they probably won't have, but *if* they do, what's wrong with
hiring a van for the afternoon?

Because the van hire company is the other side of town, and they might
not have a suitable vehicle at short notice. And you have the problem of
storing the items at the shop while you go and fetch the van. And then
taking the van back. All extremely tedious.

Isn't it Ikea which hires out its own fleet of vans?
--
Annabel Smyth
http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/index.html
Website updated 7 August 2004 - for a limited time, be bored by my holiday
snaps!

Many Birds with One Stone
 

On Wed, 11 Aug 2004 09:44:52 +0100, Roland Perry
wrote:

So instead of getting the whatever that you carefully picked out in
the shop, at home and useful that afternoon; you get to take a day off
work, and wait in all of next Thursday, in the hope that the one they
deliver from the warehouse doesn't have a big scratch on the side.

Indeed. While I am very much part of the target demographic for
things like supermarket delivery, I just can't guarantee to be in at
any given point to receive delivery of an item, and I wouldn't want
such things delivering to work.

Indeed, I'd rather lug a big box on the bus (and I've done it before),
or worst case in a taxi, than try to arrange a delivery, though
fortunately these days I have and use a car for such things.

Neil

--
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
To e-mail use neil at the above domain

Many Birds with One Stone
 

On Wed, 11 Aug 2004 10:17:02 +0000 (UTC), "Brimstone"
wrote:

So you pay out the costs of owning a car so that you can go a buy a new TV
and carry it home yourself every few years? An interesting slant on
cost/benefit analysis.

Not everything in this world is down to cost. Seen objectively, the
ownership of a car makes no financial sense to me whatsoever, given
that it gets used only a couple of times a week (I commute by bike).
However, it was a lifestyle decision, and one I do not regret at all.

Indeed, I'd go so far to say that the world is a far worse place for
the obsession with cost that seems so prevolent at the moment.

Neil

--
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
To e-mail use neil at the above domain

Many Birds with One Stone
 

Neil Williams wrote:

Indeed, I'd go so far to say that the world is a far worse place for
the obsession with cost that seems so prevolent at the moment.


Very true. The concept of "value for money" seems to have got lost.

Many Birds with One Stone
 

Roland Perry wrote in message o.uk...
What's actually happening is that over the period of ownership of the
car, people find *enough* times they need to transport something large,
or go somewhere inconvenient for public transport, or travel at hours
that public transport doesn't work, or on routes that PT fail to
support.

Bingo. And of course once you own, tax and insure that car for the
above reasons, the incremental cost of journeys where public transport
is an alternative is lower then that of the PT.

Many Birds with One Stone
 

In message , at 13:35:29 on Wed,
11 Aug 2004, Annabel Smyth remarked:
Isn't it Ikea which hires out its own fleet of vans?

Yes, I think they do. The nearest IKEA to me is as little as ten miles
away, but I'd probably need to drive there as it's on an industrial park
next to the motorway. And they don't sell TVs.
--
Roland Perry

Many Birds with One Stone
 

Annabel Smyth wrote:

Gawnsoft wrote:

Have you figures to back this up? In my experience, taxi's are often
used for multiple occupancy, whereas most car journeys are
single-occupant.

Taxi's what? Which taxi, and what belongs to it? I'm afraid your
post makes no sense, as written.

You'll have to forgive him - he's a grocer at heart.


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.734 / Virus Database: 488 - Release Date: 04/08/04

Many Birds with One Stone
 

On Wed, 11 Aug 2004 17:19:39 +0100, Tom Anderson wrote:
That said, a degree of decentralisation is useful, and in fact quite
natural. Perhaps London isn't decentralised enough. However, i think one
should be wary of decentralisation as a solution - i'd hate to lose Oxford
street in favour of a dozen Mare Streets.

Well, good for you, most people hate crowded shopping streets. Personally
I have no idea what the attraction is, but then I have no idea why someone
would "go shopping".

You want Oxford street and the associated traffic, smelly busses,
pickpockets, and other undesriabilities, thats fine. The rest of us will
be happy with dispersed shops. Hell, even American strip malls would be
better then your average London market or shopping street.

Many Birds with One Stone
 

On Tue, 10 Aug 2004 23:39:19 +0000, Gawnsoft wrote:

On Tue, 10 Aug 2004 16:51:07 +0100, "Paul Weaver"
wrote (more or less):

"JNugent" wrote in message
...
The large number of taxis in provincial cities (I cite Liverpool in
particular, with over 1500 licensed taxis) could not be sustained if
patronised only by "rich" people (who, in places outside London,
encounter far less restriction on car-use anyway, and are to be found
in very small numbers).

Sorry, I didn't notice this was anywhere but uk.transport.london. In
London, taxi's are more expensive then concorde - about £3 per mile. I
know that even black cabs in chester are around £1/mile, a reasonable
cost (especially given the lack of any other means of transport)

And given that the cost is per vehicle mile, rather than per passenger
mile.

As is a car cost. Sure, if you're 4 or 5 people in a taxi it's not the end
of the world price wise, but then a car with 5 people in costs about 5p
per person per mile including fixed car ownership costs, or
London-Manchester for £20 return. The average load factor in devon is
1.4 people per taxi (http://www.cfit.gov.uk/research/psbi/lek/a1051/). No
more details, whether that includes the driver (in which case load factor
is 0.4, less then half that of the worst case car scenario), or if not -
includes times when there are no passangers.

Many Birds with One Stone
 

"Neil Williams" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 11 Aug 2004 09:44:52 +0100, Roland Perry
wrote:
So instead of getting the whatever that you carefully picked out in
the shop, at home and useful that afternoon; you get to take a day off
work, and wait in all of next Thursday, in the hope that the one they
deliver from the warehouse doesn't have a big scratch on the side.

Indeed. While I am very much part of the target demographic for
things like supermarket delivery, I just can't guarantee to be in at
any given point to receive delivery of an item, and I wouldn't want
such things delivering to work.

I suppose I'm an even better match for such a service; my landlord happily
accepts packages of all sorts for tenants and drops them inside our door for
free. I've had furniture delivered when I wasn't home, though of course
they didn't put it where I wanted it :) FedEx and UPS packages are dropped
for me quite frequently; even though I "work from home", I'm out of town
most days so this service is invaluable.

Groceries would be tougher, since many of them need to be put in the
refrigerator or freezer upon arrival; I doubt my landlord would go that far.
Unfortunately there's no delivery service in my area, so I drive the 3
blocks to the store every other week.

S

--
Stephen Sprunk "Those people who think they know everything
CCIE #3723 are a great annoyance to those of us who do."
K5SSS --Isaac Asimov

Many Birds with One Stone
 

Paul Weaver wrote:

On Wed, 11 Aug 2004 17:19:39 +0100, Tom Anderson wrote:
That said, a degree of decentralisation is useful, and in fact quite
natural. Perhaps London isn't decentralised enough. However, i think one
should be wary of decentralisation as a solution - i'd hate to lose
Oxford street in favour of a dozen Mare Streets.

Well, good for you, most people hate crowded shopping streets. Personally
I have no idea what the attraction is, but then I have no idea why someone
would "go shopping".

You want Oxford street and the associated traffic, smelly busses,
pickpockets, and other undesriabilities, thats fine. The rest of us will
be happy with dispersed shops. Hell, even American strip malls would be
better then your average London market or shopping street.

"Nobody goes there anymore, it's too crowded."

You're joking, right? Call me crazy, but I normally associate crowds with
popularity.

Mark

Many Birds with One Stone
 

Mark wrote:

You're joking, right? Call me crazy, but I normally associate crowds
with popularity.

So does that make vehicle congestion popular?

Many Birds with One Stone
 

On Wed, 11 Aug 2004 at 18:11:54, JNugent
wrote:

Annabel Smyth wrote:

Gawnsoft wrote:

Have you figures to back this up? In my experience, taxi's are often
used for multiple occupancy, whereas most car journeys are
single-occupant.

Taxi's what? Which taxi, and what belongs to it? I'm afraid your
post makes no sense, as written.

You'll have to forgive him - he's a grocer at heart.

If not a greengrocer!
--
Annabel - "Mrs Redboots"
(trying out a new .sig to reflect the personality I use in online forums)

Many Birds with One Stone
 

In message , at 08:23:58 on Thu, 12
Aug 2004, Brimstone remarked:
Call me crazy, but I normally associate crowds with popularity.

So does that make vehicle congestion popular?

No, but the routes the vehicles are attempting to take are clearly far
too popular.
--
Roland Perry

Many Birds with One Stone
 

On Thu, 12 Aug 2004 08:23:58 +0000, Brimstone wrote:

Mark wrote:

You're joking, right? Call me crazy, but I normally associate crowds
with popularity.

So does that make vehicle congestion popular?

Hell no, neither are overflowing trains. People only get into congestion
(of whatever sort) because they have no choice.

Many Birds with One Stone
 

On Thu, 12 Aug 2004 01:20:39 -0500, Stephen Sprunk wrote:
Groceries would be tougher, since many of them need to be put in the
refrigerator or freezer upon arrival; I doubt my landlord would go that far.
Unfortunately there's no delivery service in my area, so I drive the 3
blocks to the store every other week.

You'd have to go to the store every day or two if you were carrying food
back.

Many Birds with One Stone
 

Paul Weaver wrote:
On Thu, 12 Aug 2004 01:20:39 -0500, Stephen Sprunk wrote:

Groceries would be tougher, since many of them need to be put in the
refrigerator or freezer upon arrival; I doubt my landlord would go that far.
Unfortunately there's no delivery service in my area, so I drive the 3
blocks to the store every other week.


You'd have to go to the store every day or two if you were carrying food
back.

Some of us cope with that. It does, of course, depend on how close by
your shops are, and how fit you are - but it's certainly not an
insurmountable problem. The new Tesco Express/Metro and Sainsburys Local
shops popping up all over the place help to meet this need very well in
London.

--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London

Many Birds with One Stone
 

On Thu, 12 Aug 2004 19:04:31 +0100, Dave Arquati wrote:

Paul Weaver wrote:
On Thu, 12 Aug 2004 01:20:39 -0500, Stephen Sprunk wrote:

Groceries would be tougher, since many of them need to be put in the
refrigerator or freezer upon arrival; I doubt my landlord would go that far.
Unfortunately there's no delivery service in my area, so I drive the 3
blocks to the store every other week.


You'd have to go to the store every day or two if you were carrying food
back.

Some of us cope with that. It does, of course, depend on how close by
your shops are, and how fit you are - but it's certainly not an
insurmountable problem. The new Tesco Express/Metro and Sainsburys Local
shops popping up all over the place help to meet this need very well in
London.

That's what I do at the moment, fortunatly my shifts and 24 hour stores
allow it (except on Sundays), still annoying waste of an hour every two
days though. Invovles the lovely walk along the A4 from North End road to
Cromwell Street and back of course - or a walk from costsly safeway at
shepherds bush with heavy bags

Aren't Express/Compact/Meetro stores more expensive? They certainly have
less of a choice - although I'm used to supermarkets selling clothes,
DVD's, TV's etc. Safeway at the bush is better in that regard, but not
best. Looking forward to moving out in 40 days :D

Many Birds with One Stone
 

On Thu, 12 Aug 2004 at 19:58:22, Paul Weaver
wrote:

That's what I do at the moment, fortunatly my shifts and 24 hour stores
allow it (except on Sundays), still annoying waste of an hour every two
days though. Invovles the lovely walk along the A4 from North End road to
Cromwell Street and back of course - or a walk from costsly safeway at
shepherds bush with heavy bags

What about North End Road Market, or doesn't that exist any more? I
used to shop there, years ago.

Aren't Express/Compact/Meetro stores more expensive?

Sainsbury's are, by miles. I don't go to them if I can help it.
--
Annabel - "Mrs Redboots"
(trying out a new .sig to reflect the personality I use in online forums)

Many Birds with One Stone
 

On Thu, 12 Aug 2004 20:27:35 +0100, Annabel Smyth wrote:

On Thu, 12 Aug 2004 at 19:58:22, Paul Weaver
wrote:

That's what I do at the moment, fortunatly my shifts and 24 hour stores
allow it (except on Sundays), still annoying waste of an hour every two
days though. Invovles the lovely walk along the A4 from North End road
to Cromwell Street and back of course - or a walk from costsly safeway
at shepherds bush with heavy bags

What about North End Road Market, or doesn't that exist any more? I
used to shop there, years ago.

The market is way down the other end of the road, near fulham. Why the
hell would I buy food from 6 or 7 different stalls (even if they did sell
what I wanted, instead of dodgy CD's and other forgeries) with dubious
hygiene at the best of time? I take it they do frozen pizzas and 6 packs
of orange juice there?

Many Birds with One Stone
 

On Thu, 12 Aug 2004 20:27:35 +0100, Annabel Smyth
wrote:


Aren't Express/Compact/Meetro stores more expensive?

Sainsbury's are, by miles. I don't go to them if I can help it.

They are a veritable Lidl when compared to Waitrose.


greg
--
Konnt ihr mich horen?
Konnt ihr mich sehen?
Konnt ihr mich fuhlen?
Ich versteh euch nicht

Many Birds with One Stone
 

Roland Perry wrote:
Oh, I dunno - our car spends most of its life in the garage; we really
only keep it because we tend to take motoring holidays. And it gets
used on Sundays and one Wednesday a month. Other than that, in a normal
month, it lives in the garage.

Well, that's obviously *enough* usage for you, then. Odd how
it varies from person to person. PT's big drawback is assuming
one size fits all.

Er. Buses, buses with winding routes, buses on express routes,
trains, the underground, all that. Is that one-size? If so,
the worlds most fabulously comprehensive public transport system
could be sniped at by saying "it assumes one size fits all".
Perahps you mean PT's big drawback is not providing people with
their own car?

#Paul

Many Birds with One Stone
 

Paul Weaver wrote:

On Thu, 12 Aug 2004 19:04:31 +0100, Dave Arquati wrote:


Paul Weaver wrote:

On Thu, 12 Aug 2004 01:20:39 -0500, Stephen Sprunk wrote:


Groceries would be tougher, since many of them need to be put in the
refrigerator or freezer upon arrival; I doubt my landlord would go that far.
Unfortunately there's no delivery service in my area, so I drive the 3
blocks to the store every other week.


You'd have to go to the store every day or two if you were carrying food
back.

Some of us cope with that. It does, of course, depend on how close by
your shops are, and how fit you are - but it's certainly not an
insurmountable problem. The new Tesco Express/Metro and Sainsburys Local
shops popping up all over the place help to meet this need very well in
London.


That's what I do at the moment, fortunatly my shifts and 24 hour stores
allow it (except on Sundays), still annoying waste of an hour every two
days though. Invovles the lovely walk along the A4 from North End road to
Cromwell Street and back of course - or a walk from costsly safeway at
shepherds bush with heavy bags

Tesco Kensington I take it... yes, the A4 isn't particularly nice to
walk along is it!

One solution which I haven't tried out myself is the elderly person's
shopping trolley thing which they wheel about like a suitcase. They
should really make them in patterns other than tartan; they might get
some custom from Imperial students! :-)

Aren't Express/Compact/Meetro stores more expensive? They certainly have
less of a choice - although I'm used to supermarkets selling clothes,
DVD's, TV's etc. Safeway at the bush is better in that regard, but not
best. Looking forward to moving out in 40 days :D

I had a choice between a Sainsburys Local practically next door and
Sainsburys on Cromwell Road about 15 mins walk away. The prices were
more expensive at the Local and the goods were more restricted - but
having everyday items close at hand helped extend the periods between
having to go to the larger store.

--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London

Many Birds with One Stone
 

On Fri, 13 Aug 2004 00:03:11 +0100, Steve Firth wrote:

Paul Weaver wrote:

Invovles the lovely walk along the A4 from North End road to
Cromwell Street and back of course

Umm, isn't the Safeway by the Cromwell much, much closer?

Which safeway? Only one I know in the area is the one in shepherds bush