🚀 go-pugleaf

David L. Cathey (davidc@montagar.com) wrote:
: In article <1994Nov13.170318.20001@mksol.dseg.ti.com>, mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (Fred McCall) writes:
: > Benjamin J. Sloan (ben@.uucp) wrote:
: > : The federal highway dollars being spent right now, out of your income
: > : tax, to build 183 and Ben White elevated freeways could probably
: > : maintain Austin streets for "bicyclists only" for a century.  
: > 
: > And just how much gasoline tax was collected from those bicycles?
: > None, you say?  Then it seems quite a stretch to try to claim that
: > money should be spent for the benefit of a minority.

: 	You seem confused here, Fred.  If we went "bicyclists only", the
: existing streets would be just fine.  No money would need to be spent on
: 183, the Ben White elevated freeway and numerous other street projects, much
: less "be spent for the benefit of a minority".

No, but you seem to be confused, Dave.  You have to look at what my
response was in response TO.  In other words, it was asserted that the
Federal highway funds (from gasoline taxes, not income taxes, as Mr
Sloan asserted) currently being spent on those projects could be used
to maintain Austin streets for bicycles only for a century.  My point
is that those funds come from CARS (burning gasoline), not from BIKES.

: 	Almost no money is spent to the benefit of the minority as it stands
: now (183 and BW isn't being funded to the cyclists benefit, that's for
: certain).

Well, that seems pretty obvious, but then that wasn't what Mr Sloan
was asserting would be a better use for the money (taken from the
majority, who are driving cars).  Did you have a point here, or merely
misunderstand? 

-- 
"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live
 in the real world."   -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fred.McCall@dseg.ti.com - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me.