Rant about Epping Road (1 Viewer)

[Nebuchanezzar]

No. You choose to live further away.

I do? Wait, no I don't. My grandparents were too poor to afford a university education for their kids, my parents were also not encouraged to go to uni. In turn, they weren't able to secure employment that was high paying originally and had to buy a house on the outskirts of the city because it was the only place they could afford to live. Fast foward 20 years, things have changed for the better a bit. The end.

Okay some circumstances may beyond your control, but that's life.

Doesn't have to be pal.

I don't want to sound like WAF here, but saying we need to level the playing feild who cant afford to live in certain areas is almost communism.

OH NOES!

There are already adequate social security provisions in Australia to ensure you have access to employment. Work hard, commute everyday, and someday move somewhere better.

This is oversimplfying the scenario, and you know it. My parents do work hard, they work very hard, they've always worked very hard and I wouldn't doubt that they work any less hard than a doctor, lawyer, or corporate honcho. Unfortunately, their hard work doesn't entitle them to move into careers with enough money in them to move out of the area. We have a home loan like everyone else, we need to eat, and we're entitled to modest luxuries like everyone else in Australia is. I don't want to go too much into personal finances here, but suffice to say that there isn't enough money to move elsewhere, and while I can't be sure, I'm willing to bet that it's a similar situation for a good majority of people who live out here.

We're entitled, as citizens, to have access to equal provisions as everyone else. Ergo, we have the right to expect that the state levels out the playing field. No-one should be more disadvantaged than anyone else. It's only fair.

Of course, there shouldn't be "better" places available in a city in the first place.

Its actually brilliant because it is not attractive for many motorists so it doesnt act as a disinsentive to use public transport. However, it is used by many, many trucks which have no alternative but to use the roads. This saves the truck companies much money which finances the building of the roads through the hefty tolls they pay. All motorists also benefit because trucks are a major cause of conjestion, road deterioration and fatal accidents.

Trucks should be replaced by trains wherever possible.

I'm not suggesting that there shouldn't be an interchange where two motorways cross one another. But that thing is unnessecarily extravagant.

 

[scarybunny]

It's an intersection between two huge motorways, with NO traffic lights at all.

How would you have planned it?

The USA is full of them, so the freeways are always moving.

 

[withoutaface]

Oh ok well there's so many things thats shit about this state government I don't know whats what

That's prettty shit about wanting to give the University the land :/

 

[jb_nc]

FAMILY VALUES

*increases punishment for growing/possessing weed*

 

[katie_tully]

relatives of mine live in epping. i always get lost. i always end up in parramatta when i'm trying to go back home.
is this normal? is parramatta a normal by-route when trying to get back to windsor?

i just dont know. but shut the fuck up anyway, atleast your shitty road is sealed motherfucker.

 

[katie_tully]

Yeh, yeh. Everyone has a hard luck story. I'm all for helping poor people but disadvantaged people in Australia already get taxed at a lower rate, recieve transfer payments and are entitled to other concessions. They do not need another concession for road usage which is wasteful due to the administrative costs of claiming the rebate and encourages use of private vehicles over public transport.
.

k while you're at it, make sure i get a tax cut. $395 in tax is fucking bullshit, i only worked six days

 

[Nebuchanezzar]

It's an intersection between two huge motorways, with NO traffic lights at all.

How would you have planned it?

The USA is full of them, so the freeways are always moving.

If the US does it, it must be a good idea, amirite?
And maybe this is something I've heard from horribly inaccurate reports, but uh, isn't the Los Angeles highway system, full of four level and cloverlead interchanges horribly, horribly, horribly congested? I think it is.

How would I have planned it? Dunno. I'm not a road designer. There are plenty of intersections in Sydney that receive more traffic than the Light Traffic Infarcestructure (olol) that cope...decently. Couple that with the fact that most traffic that goes through that intersection goes straight on either way, and the case for that mega piece of shit isn't looking very good.

Yeh, yeh. Everyone has a hard luck story. I'm all for helping poor people but disadvantaged people in Australia already get taxed at a lower rate, recieve transfer payments and are entitled to other concessions. They do not need another concession for road usage which is wasteful due to the administrative costs of claiming the rebate and encourages use of private vehicles over public transport.

It works out more expensive for us to drive to the city per week, even with the rebate, than to catch public transport. It hardly encourages the use of private vehicles. It merely makes one route into the city which is currently (and for a long time will be) dependant upon roads for travel. Therefore, until something is done about it, those of us who have it hard are entitled to get it cheaper, to level out the playing field.

Exactly. We should all live in identical houses provided by the state. Are you for real?

We should all receive a sum of money from the government that enables everyone to build a modest house according to their own specifications.

Yes, but for short haul shipping within the Sydney metro area it is not possible. You cannot deliever a load from say the woolworths warehouse to your local supermarket by rail. Trucks are necessary, and diverting thousands each day from suburban roads to the M7 is beneficial to everyone.

Please. The number of short haul trucks that use the M7 would be minimal compared to those who don't need to use the M7. Unless you're suggesting that we build four level stack interchanges on every single intersection, then stfu. It is a frivilous waste of money.

Also the fact that its not being used at full capacity now is indicative of good planning in anticipating for future demand. It is far more expensive to upgrade old infrastructure than to build it properly to begin with.

On one hand, you advocate taxing people so they don't use roads. On the other hand, you advocate building massive interchanges to anticipate future usage. Make up your mind.

And no, it's not indicative of good management since it encourages road usage in the future. Road usage will inevitably become expensive due to rising oil prices (peak oil yo), and unfashionable due to global warming. It was moronic to build that thing. To clarify, I justify rebates for poor people because there are no fair alternatives, not because I think we should use roads.

 

[scarybunny]

Er.. been to LA and the traffic doesn't stop on freeways. It gets congested if it's peak hour due to the sheer volume of cars, as well as accidents and whatnot, but the cloverleaf interchanges work brilliantly.

 

[katie_tully]

I'll have to find it, but I've got a photo of me chatting with Michael Costa when he was the useless Roads Minister. It looks like I'm showing him how big his doodle is. He looks pretty interested in what I had to say.

Basically he showed up for the opening of a road. And by the opening of a road I mean he funded 1km of tar on a 45 km road. Nice work Costa.



EDIT: for the record it was 2 inches.

 

[Tulipa]

It's an intersection between two huge motorways, with NO traffic lights at all.

How would you have planned it?

The USA is full of them, so the freeways are always moving.

I love and dearly miss the US freeway system.

If the US does it, it must be a good idea, amirite?
And maybe this is something I've heard from horribly inaccurate reports, but uh, isn't the Los Angeles highway system, full of four level and cloverlead interchanges horribly, horribly, horribly congested? I think it is.

During peak hour, hell yes, because there is an absurd amount of people living and working in LA and infrastructure hasn't caught up with the constant growth in population (which happens almost absolutely anywhere, except Perth where they have remarkable foresight).

Other cities though have lovely, beautiful freeway systems. *sigh*

 

[Nebuchanezzar]

Oh so the US freeway system works brilliantly except for the point in time where it's meant to work brilliantly. olol.

I've heard the same about New York City freeways (Long Island Expressway) and Boston's ones before they were all redone too. meh.

And don't skimp over my point that Sydney isn't even big enough to justify one...except maybe on the meccano set. Everytime I've been there that thing's packed.

 

[Tulipa]

It works quite well in cities that are the size of Sydney. So that addresses your point which I actually didn't see in your original post.

EDIT: Also, the reason that peak hour is so shit in LA is because first of all, it's peak hour, secondly, there's virtually no public transport and thirdly, it has a huge population boom going on at the moment.

EDIT2: Back to Sydney traffic, Epping road seems to be much better these days so I don't really understand why the OP is all up in arms. Also, why is Pacific Highway called a highway when it has parking, traffic lights and areas where the speed limit is 50? That is a fucking annoying road.

 

[Nebuchanezzar]

It works quite well in cities that are the size of Sydney.

Cause there's no traffic on them lol

 

[Kwayera]

North Shore residents take the Pacific Highway, you ignorant twat.

Only the dumb ones.

The rest of us avoid it like the plague.

 

[chicky_pie]

damn look at that disease around his mouth, typical Italian

 

[Nebuchanezzar]

Dear Nebuchanezzar, if you're going to continue posting such fervent opinions about economic policy, please, master some basic concepts of economics.

Dear Zimmerman, if you're going to continue posting in NCAP, please refrain from insulting me or I'll report you.

If the price of road transport decreases relative to the price of public transport, that is equivelent to a disinsentive to use public transport, which by your own admission would be dangerous and foolish since "Road usage will inevitably become expensive due to rising oil prices (peak oil yo), and unfashionable due to global warming."

Public transport should be cheaper for poorer people too. Don't get me wrong, eh he he

If everyone recieves a sum of money from the government this would fuel a huge increase in demand. As a result, prices would rise and thus negate the benefits of the government assitance.

Only if there was no supply, and I don't quite see how that would occur. In this society, individuals are given a sum of money, and they may only spend this amount of money. No more, no less. They may modify their houses to be individual, but there's to be nothing special about any particular house. Every house would be worth exactly the same amount of money. If the land is more expensive, you build a smaller house. If the land is cheap, you can build a bigger house. There would be no excess demand because everyone would be able to build their own house. There would be no waiting lists. Government intervention would of course be needed to ensure that everyone wasn't moving into the nicest suburbs. People are housed according to their needs. While there's room for individuality in housing, you would only be able to be housed in an area near your work station.

The government already provides sufficient public housing and rent assistance, we have some of the lowest rates of homelesness in the world. What you are suggesting is just totally unworkable.

Please. Public housing in Sydney is run down and decrepid. No-one should have to live in some of these places. Not that this has anything to do with anything we're talking about though, olol.

Finally, are you aware that the M7 was built by private investors and is financed by tolls which consumers voluntarily pay, thus making your apparent perception that public money was wasted on the project totally misplaced.

It skipped my mind, unfortunately. However, not for one moment do I believe that the construction, maintainance and eventual tranferral to the government (in 34 years time) didn't and won't cost the taxpayer a cent. That's ludicrous.

And it's still wasteful.

 

[Nebuchanezzar]

Yeah but the Chinese Government also likes to kill its own citizens, so whatdda they know eh?

 

[katie_tully]

Dear Zimmerman, if you're going to continue posting in NCAP, please refrain from insulting me or I'll report you.

Man, you are such a pussy.

 

[Nebuchanezzar]

It's my gimmick?

 

[scarybunny]

Heh I like the "Well this government did something wrong that's completely unrelated, so therefore everything else they did is wrong too" argument.