Dear T,
Interesting about the Cut-Off. This is EXACTLY why we fought like hell to
keep it from becoming an "interim" rail-trail.
Chuck
pennsyk4_@_optonlin
e.net
Sent by: To
erielack-owner_@_li TrainGG1@aol.com
sts.elhts.org cc
jananran_@_mymailstation.com,
erielack_@_lists.elhts.org
08/19/2006 08:21 Subject
AM Re: (erielack) Re: commuter
railroads
Please respond to
pennsyk4_@_optonlin
e.net
Bill,
Your commentary is right on the money - and everything else!.
Metropolitan NY has some very fine commuter railway systems serving Long
Island, West Chester County, and cnetral to northern NJ. However,
northwestern NJ is NOT served by rail - yet. And , as more and more people
commute to NY/NJ from northeastern PA, there is no rail service yet from
there either. THere's a conga line of busses every morning and night.
A few months ago, while hiking the old Lackawanna Cutoff (magnificent, see
it in the RR History section of our web site www.gsmrrclub.org), we ran
into some young yuppy-types in their 30s, and chatted for a moment. They
were dead against reactivating this phenominal rail system, for all of the
wrong reasons. I think the new term is "NIMBYs" - not in my back yard.
Lots of politics, and the baloney that goes with it. If reactivating the
CUtoff as a cummuter railway could take 1/3 of the traffic from Route 80,
and if they ran fast freights at night, the roads would be safer, less
pollution, and we'd have a more effective use of resources.
But, human nature being what it is, the uninformed or misinformed public
will be against public transportation.
T
- ----- Original Message -----
From: TrainGG1_@_aol.com
Date: Saturday, August 19, 2006 2:06 am
Subject: (erielack) Re: commuter railroads
> While it is interesting to compare prices (and I do all the time
> when it
> comes to travel), the grief and aggrivation of driving, what with
> the goofballs
> who insist on driving down BOTH lanes (pick one and stay in it,
> thank you),
> talk on their cell phones (instead of watching the road), do not
> know how to
> act at four-way stops, etc., not to mention finding/paying for
> parking (I know
> how it is in Chicago, New York has to be even worse), makes the
> suburban
> train very attractive -- so long as it takes you near to where you
> want to go.
>
> Do not know how it is elsewhere, but among rail/transit enthusiasts
> in
> Chicago, I am one of the few who actually use the service. I take
> it to work, take
> it to shop, and most of the time take it to go railfanning. It is
> easy for
> many (fans, especially) to say what a shame it is that more people
> do not use
> transit, but many do not "put their money where their mouth is."
>
> The long worn-out comment that "If there was a train near me I
> would use it"
> is, for the most part not a valid comment. Now before I hear from
> alot of
> you that where they live/work there is no transit alternative,
> think about this.
> Most more than likely do not live/work in a rural area (and if you
> do, of
> course this does not apply). However, if you took a job downtown
> in a major
> metropolitan area (New York, Philadelphia, Chicago, to name three),
> chances are
> you decided to live where you live AFTER you took that job. You
> therefore
> have a choice as to where to live. To CHOOSE to live out in the
> sticks away from
> any available transit means you knowingly make yourself
> unavailable to
> transit -- not the other way around.
>
> I CHOOSE to use public transit, and my work and my home are
> convenient to
> twenty-hour-a-day rapid transit service (if I am willing to walk a
> mine and a
> quarter I have service the other four hours of the day as well).
> Thus I made
> the deliberate effort to live where I live so that I could use
> transit...most
> make the deliberate effort to live where they CANNOT use transit.
> It is (for
> the most part, I believe) YOUR choice -- do not blame the transit
> agencies.
> Although I ride at a reduced rate (due to a physical disability),
> even the
> full fare of $75 a month, which is good on all of the Chicago
> Transit Authority
> and PACE (the Chicago area suburban bus operator) is far cheaper
> than owning
> and operating a vehicle. I am not affected by the $3.00 a gallon
> gas price,
> I do not worry about parking ($200.00 a month in downtown
> Chicago), nor do I
> worry about insurance, license plates, village stickers, etc.
>
> I CHOOSE to live this way...and because I do, on those occasions
> when I go
> out railfanning with someone in an auto I am happy to pay the $3.00
> a gallon
> for gas -- because it is a luxury -- one I can afford due to my
> lower
> transportation expenses. If I have to rent a car (which is done
> once, sometimes twice
> a year), so be it -- again, it is a luxury which can be afforded,
> why?
> Because $400.00 a month or more is NOT being spent on
> owning/maintaining/operating
> a vehicle.
>
> No doubt some will disagree, and that is your right. For most
> transit is an
> option because you CHOOSE not to use it, or you CHOOSE not to
> live/work near
> where service is available. Yes, an auto is convenient (and until a
> few years
> ago I was the owner of one). Many of my co-workers moan, groan,
> gripe and
> complain about how tiring it is to drive from/to work and how much
> is costs for
> gas/parking is -- and seem to not notice when I tell them I get a
> 45 minute
> nap on the "L" while making the same commute. At that point you
> have to as "is
> it (driving) worth it?"
>
> Anyway, there is my two cents worth.
>
> Bill Shapotkin
>
>
> The Erie Lackawanna Mailing List
> Sponsored by the ELH&TS
> http://www.elhts.org
>
The Erie Lackawanna Mailing List
Sponsored by the ELH&TS
http://www.elhts.org
The Erie Lackawanna Mailing List
Sponsored by the ELH&TS
http://www.elhts.org
------------------------------
This HTML page is © 2000-2008 Blue Moon Online System and The Railfan Network
This page and the data contained therein may not be reproduced
for any form of commercial use without the explicit permission
of J. Henry Priebe Jr. or his duly authorized agent.