After reading it, wanted to ask WG what the effect of inflation and wages was on the cost of a gallon of gasoline in the years since it was $.32/gal. You saved me the trouble, again, thanks.
You have that backwards.
Rising fuel costs have adversely affected the cost of most everything else in our society.
When gasoline cost 32¢ per gallon, we were living in an era when a single wage earner could raise a family of four in the suburbs, and still set aside enough savings for retirement and send the kids off to college.
Nowadays, it takes a multi-family income to achieve the same standard of living, and ironically, multi-vehicle families who consume more gasoline than the average family of the '60s.
As someone upthread said, paraphrasing, rail is something urbanites want everyone else to pay for.
Are you suggesting that urbanites don't pay taxes like the rest of us???
Millions of hardworking, taxpaying Americans from all walks of life use passenger rail systems to commute back-and-forth to work everyday.
I sincerely hope that you're not among the shameful bigots who utilize "urbanite" and other "code words" to conjure up negative stereotypes of inner city residents.
Jeez Wille, Alinsky's Rules for Radicals clearly states that the tactic that drags on is a drag.
Accusing real conservatives of bigotry and racism doesn't work anymore. Go peddle your guilt-trip elsewhere.
You have that backwards. Rising fuel costs have adversely affected the cost of most everything else in our society. When gasoline cost 32¢ per gallon, we were living in an era when a single wage earner could raise a family of four in the suburbs, and still set aside enough savings for retirement and send the kids off to college. Nowadays, it takes a multi-family income to achieve the same standard of living, and ironically, multi-vehicle families who consume more gasoline than the average family of the '60s.
A strawman, but here goes. We can still have single earner families today but in the era you're referring to, everyone didn't have to have a 4000 sq/ft McMansion, they didn't have $600 electric bills because there wasn't nearly the amount of air conditioning then compared to now, they didn't have to have two cars and associated expenses because women hadn't been told they weren't living fulfilling lives by working in the home (please don't spin my words and tell me that I'm suggesting that there weren't two wage earner families, that's not what I'm saying). We're using more gasoline now because we have two (or more) car families so both wage earners can can pay for all this stuff. In the sixties one car / wage earner families were not uncommon and if people elected to live at those standards today, single earner families wouldn't be uncommon today.
As someone upthread said, paraphrasing, rail is something urbanites want everyone else to pay for.
Are you suggesting that urbanites don't pay taxes like the rest of us???
Not in the least. I'm suggesting exactly what "someone upthread said" and I'll say it again. Read it slowly for full comprehension: rail is something urbanites want everyone else to pay for. I will give a little here and say rail is something urbanites want everyone else to help pay for so you won't be able to nit pick that little distinction.
Millions of hardworking, taxpaying Americans from all walks of life use passenger rail systems to commute back-and-forth to work everyday. I sincerely hope that you're not among the shameful bigots who utilize "urbanite" and other "code words" to conjure up negative stereotypes of inner city residents.
No, WIllie, it was a simple statement meant to be taken at face value. I don't have to spin words or use the bullying tactics of your last sentence (above). The rail systems being built and that have built in the recent past ARE in urban areas and the people promoting them are forcing the rest of us that don't live near them or have reason to use them to pay for them. Face value, nothing more. Oh, I'm not certain, but I think you mean "shameless" bigot. I wouldn't want to put words in your mouth.