Quote:
Originally Posted by plutonicpanda
Just because you think it will cause those things doesn't mean it will. It is one to state you believe it will cause those things and another to state that someone supports those things because you think they are too stupid to not understand what they are in favor of. Get real. I suppose I took your comment the wrong way much like you whine about my comments being insulting when they aren't.
|
Did you notice another posts right above yours, where another poster immediately understood the distinction I was drawing?
You, on the other hand, just repeated two erroneous things.
1) that I accused someone of supporting pollution or poverty etc when I clearly did not and have explained that ad nauseum.
2) You insist that what i say is a feeling when its evidence-supported fact.
More lane-miles of highway WILL mean more cars. Where cars produce 'x' pollution per mile driven in Houston, as if they were driven anywhere else, more cars equals more pollution. There is nothing in Houston's proposal that reduces per vehicle emissions.
Further, I have explained the basic math of property taxes and municipal services in my previous posts. I have noted that increased sprawl does increase the cost burden on Houston/its suburban neighbours. There is no real argument against this (feel free to make one). Living on an acre at the edge of the urban region mean incremental costs to deliver you water, sewer, electricity, roads, school buses, garbage pick-up that would either not exist, or be substantially lower if you located that new resident in an already built up area.
Ergo, taxes must rise (or service quality decline) in order to support sprawl.
That impacts the poorest citizens the most.
An incremental tax hike of 10% on a 6k property tax bill is $600, if paid by someone earning 20k per year, that is much more harmful than if paid by someone earning 100k per year.
Even if the higher earner pays a larger total bill and faces a larger total increase, the impact is more harmful the person who can barely pay their bills than the person who might have to fly economy on vacation instead.
I don't see why you insist on arguing these aren't facts. They aren't feelings. They are the result of sprawl and its a straight-line assessment of construction and operation costs of infrastructure and their resulting impact.
If you wish to defend that, so be it. If you would like to mitigate it in some way, other than the way I have proposed, by all means put that proposal forward.
But the Facts are, that new/widened highways are a negative on muncipal budgets, not only for their direct cost, but the costs of the development that occurs as a result of said highway construction.
That is not ideological; its not partisan, I'm not proposing demolishing all suburbs or 1/2 of them, I'm not proposing extortionist road tolls or banning cars.
I'm suggesting that this particular proposal is not in Houston's best interests, as currently iterated.
Its not an insult to anyone or to Houston to say it can better invest its money to created a greater return in terms of dollars and quality of life for its residents.
***
For the record, I own a car, and drive; and I support this line of policy thinking in my own community, even it increases my costs.