[sustran] Re: BRTS in Delhi

[Carlosfelipe Pardo]

Sorry, when mentioning "mine is bigger than yours", I think what Sujit 
means is that, while governments are trying to show off their toys 
between themselves ("I have a nicer train", "I have a taller building"), 
they are spending money that may not even be there (e.g. going into 
debt) while many other needs aren't satisfied (food, health, education), 
which would have been covered if the toy wouldn't have been bought, 
subsidized, nationalized, etc. This happens many times with rail 
systems, while other systems are cheaper and have similar capacity (if 
properly planned), but are not as "big",  "shiny", "cool", "modern" or 
whatever adjective that can be attributed to a system that tends to 
resemble "modernity", possibly using the same definition from a 1900 
textbook on city development.

Also related: citizens are too immature many times: If they don't see 
things in their cities, they think nothing has been done. If a mayor 
redevelops the finances or improves education and reduces corruption 
while increasing voluntary tax contributions, citizens don't think that 
mayor was so good as one that will buy a big toy (and leave them to pay 
for it during 25 years or so). This perpetuates the "bigger toys" 
phenomenon, and the rest is pure orthodox and classic psychoanalysis. 
Now, give a couch to your mayor, please. I can assist in their therapy.

Carlos.

Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory wrote:
> Sujit Patwardhan wrote:
>> [...]
>
>>  Much like the
>> juvenile boast of "mine's bigger than yours" .
>> I think we need to move beyond that and face the hard reality of a 
>> choice
>> between car dominated "business as usual" scenario and the 
>> alternative "New
>> Mobility" vision that honours walking, cycling and affordable public
>> transport system -- best of which today appears to be the BRT.
>>
>> -- 
>> Sujit
>>   
> SPEAKING of "mine's bigger than yours", it seems that prejudice 
> against metro systems as part of "New Mobility" complements 
> wonderfully - and not intentionally  - high spending on military 
> equipment, also known as "Old Diplomacy".
>
> [...]
>