So this was a bit of a random effort but The Press picked it up but ran with it – in STUFF anyway. Those of you following this blog will recognise it as a slightly modified version of a
Those of you following this blog will recognise it as a slightly modified version of a previouse post.
I was under the impression that it would be in the paper as well. Alas. I must be getting old as the having it a physical form still feels more real than having it online. How things change.
Judging from the comments I probably didn’t convince many people. 50/50 for and against, and far less response than the previous effort.
On that note though, what is it with some people who comment? In most cases they clearly took whatever they wanted out of it rather than what I tried pretty carefully to convey.
For the record, this piece is looking at a specific “edge” case where cycleways and public transport MIGHT be a good solution and be of benefit those who drive, i.e. when, and only when, traffic is already heavy. When traffic is flowing well then other arguments come into play. In particular, within reason, people should be able to travel around in whatever way they prefer. Admittedly this is a harder argument as the costs and benefits between users are not as clear and harder to quantify.
Rough against rough 