"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.

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

"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

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.

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