Replies

You've put in here a number of times that you think the car and the interstate highway system it created are destroying the classic town concept that you love oh so much. I have shown that the initial destruction of small towns started when the railroad didn't go to them all and has recently accelerated because the economy has changed, especially in the root area of providing raw materials and harvesting food which is what small towns did. They have no money coming in because they have nothing to sell to people other than each other and small economies can't survive that way (because they'll need supplies from the outside world, that sends money out, if they can't send enough goods out to get at least that much money back the town will starve).

Now refute it. This is the third time I've put this forth and the only thing I've heard from you since the first one is that I'm a car lover that doesn't read what you write.

I agree that a major problem with railroads is that they don't go anywhere. Part of what I'm arguing for, I suppose, is increased public sector investment in creating light rail routes that service small and medium sized cities. Take South Florida, for example. They recently built a "light rail" system that runs from Miami all the way up to Jupiter. It stinks.

There's only one stop per town. That stop is usually 10 miles West of the Intracoastal. Essentially, you have to drive 15 minutes, park, get on the train, then take a cab for another 20 minutes if you want to go anywhere.

No doubt this system will be cited by opponents of light rail everywhere as an example of why "railroads just don't work."

Now....here's my big admission: they may be right. We may already be so far down the track (if you will) of being a car and road-oriented society that overlaying a new infrastructure of light rail is not feasilble. Our towns and cities, unlike those in Europe, have grown up in the car age and are therefore much more spread out. Having spent a lot of time in South Florida recently, I can say that it would take a monumental investment to make the train a realistic option for most people. For Heaven's sake, you've now got people living practically in the middle of the Everglades and working in Ft. Lauderdale!

The car has fundamentally altered the sense of scale in these towns, and there is probably no going back...ever. THAT is what I have been lamenting. I have admitted that I am probably just a "nostalgic curmudgeon," and I have no illusions that mere legislation or activism could (or should) be used to turn back the clock. But when I go to my hometown in Indiana, it makes me sad to see how the town has basically abandoned the beautiful, historic, and now decaying Main Street area in favor of (imho) somewhat souless and ugly strip malls near the highway.

Now, to the question: do I blame cars for this? Yes, though I do not blame cars exclusively. I also happen to agree with you that cars have been a tremendous and necessary engine of economic growth. On the whole--and it pains me to say it--I would even have to say that their impact has been largely "positive" in the sense that what we have gained outweighs what we have lost.

However, I am an anti-modernist at heart. Like Tolkien, I guess, who saw the first encroachments of factories and new suburbs on his West Midlands English countryside and knew that many beautiful things would pass out of the world as a result.

Among other things, I hate (most) International Style buildings, cell phones, and magazines.

More than you asked for, but I figured you deserved it since I flew off the handle at you.