prev <-> next
[2023-02-10 15:47:00] - https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/10/us/politics/john-fetterman-senate-stroke.html Ugh, I feel terrible for Fetterman about this. Also, more than a little annoyed that apparently it's safe to openly discuss his obvious mental and physical shortcomings now that he safely won the election. -Paul
[2023-02-10 15:43:28] - a: Not a biggie, just feels like I am repeating myself.
-Paul[2023-02-10 15:43:12] - a: I dunno, it failed to load and my message disappeared. -Paul
[2023-02-10 15:42:58] - a: "i don't ever blame individuals for making decisions with the terrible hand that we're dealt. but don't call it efficient. it's terribly inefficient compared to the alternate" I really don't know what you are saying here. That the existence of the suburbs is a terrible hand that is dealt to us? Maybe for you, but some people actually like being able to have backyards and larger living spaces. -Pa
[2023-02-10 15:40:49] - paul: it ate it? did you get an error? ~a
[2023-02-10 15:40:23] - a: "it's not your fault, it's the fault of the people who write laws, and the unelected people in government who badly follow those laws" I don't agree. Even a perfectly competent government with well intentioned people simply cannot make biking and mass transit work for my family in the suburbs. It's pretty much impossible. I need a bus to run from my house to my kids school and then straight to a rec center at a very specific time. -Paul
[2023-02-10 15:38:22] - Daniel: But either way, the fact that it's politics and two different political parties means you (the generic you, in this case) are almost always going to agree with the reasons given by your side and not agree with the reasons given by the other side. At some point you (again, universal you) need to agree on some common agreed upon frameworks on how to govern that doesn't always involve politics. -Paul
[2023-02-10 15:36:24] - Daniel: "equating supporting Jan 6th to impeaching Trump seems dumb" I'm not entirely sure what you mean by this? Did MTG support Jan 6th or something? Didn't more than those two vote to impeach Trump? The reason I saw for kicking MTG off was that she threatened a fellow politician and the reasons for kicking Schiff and Swalwell off seemed linked to leaking info and possibly being compromised by a spy. -Paul
[2023-02-10 15:34:15] - Ugh, the mb ate one of my replies. -Paul
[2023-02-09 16:01:05] - paul: (as an aside, i'm sitting in the iad terminal right now. i took the silver line to iad for the first time this morning.
) ~a[2023-02-09 15:59:25] - paul: jfc, i just realized i didn't count insurance in the (during rush-hour from herndon) $63/day! how much is your car insurance? mine used to be $.10/mi. (now it's different, but i'll admit yours could be lower if you drive a bunch). i fully admit this is yet another one of those "i'll be paying that cost regardless, and the cost doesn't go up with 'use', but it's still a cost" situations. ~a
[2023-02-09 15:59:15] - paul: "You have to live in a non-pedestrian-topia" it wasn't that. it was that the two scenarios are *not* symmetrical. the average new car price is just short of 50k. even with a much more affordable car, most people can't afford the car loan / insurance, let alone the other half-dozen costs we often disagree on. ~a
[2023-02-09 15:57:39] - paul: "There is no public transit that can get us there in time even if everything was running on time" i know this. i don't ever blame individuals for making decisions with the terrible hand that we're dealt. but don't call it efficient. it's terribly inefficient compared to the alternate. ~a
[2023-02-09 15:57:28] - paul: "finding a bike trailer that can carry all of that AND the table we use might be hard" it's usually a cargo bike, but i like to focus on foot traffic and public transportation. fuck bikes. ~a
[2023-02-09 15:44:26] - paul: "my family literally could not live the life they are living now without a car" sorry for repeating myself but i know this. it's not your fault, it's the fault of the people who write laws, and the unelected people in government who badly follow those laws, "Public transit and walking/biking is insufficient" i know this and i agree "Cars. Are. Useful." i never disagreed with this either. i. own. two. cars. ~a
[2023-02-09 15:22:23] - "what if you didn't have a choice?" Go ahead and skip to your gotcha. You have to live in a non-pedestrian-topia? Okay, then ride your bike an walk and take public transit? I am super confused. Your previous point seemed to indicate that all these options are just as convenient for everybody even in a car-centric area... -Paul
[2023-02-09 15:19:54] - a: Cars. Are. Useful. I don't know why you can't accept this. -Paul
[2023-02-09 15:19:34] - a: It's girl scout cookie season, meaning we are often transporting dozens of boxes of boxes (yes, boxes filled with boxes) of girl scout cookies from point A to point B. I think the bus would frown on waiting for us for 10 minutes to pack it up with that and finding a bike trailer that can carry all of that AND the table we use might be hard. -Paul
[2023-02-09 15:18:07] - a: Walking or biking wouldn't get us there in time even in perfect weather (and by the way, the activity is swim, so not sure biking there would be ideal). There is no public transit that can get us there in time even if everything was running on time. -Paul
[2023-02-09 15:17:16] - a: "how does this seem obvious?" I've addressed this many times, so sorry for repeating myself, but my family literally could not live the life they are living now without a car. Public transit and walking/biking is insufficient for getting us from point A to point B in C minutes. We have many times when we have to get kids from school to an after school activity in 30 minutes and driving straight there takes 30 minutes. -Paul
[2023-02-08 18:28:31] - And these aren’t even full tit for tats either. These people are only being booted off one specific committee, while gosar and greene were booted off all their committee assignments. - mig
[2023-02-08 18:27:08] - paul: mostly fine? the reasoning is backed at least some justification. Swalwell had some association with a supposed chinese spy. Schiff had been using his position on the intel committee to dangle conspiracy theories about trump that never came to fruition. Omar is an antisemite. - mig
[2023-02-08 15:42:17] - Paul: Fine in what regard? I mean they are allowed to do it but equating supporting Jan 6th to impeaching Trump seems dumb to me but also pretty representative of where the R party is at now adays. So I'm not sure I'd call it fine but I would call it normal and expected for the R party. -Daniel
[2023-02-08 15:13:45] - paul: "I don't care if a group of people want to create pedestrian-topia" i was thinking about this more in the shower, since you also said this monday.
what if you didn't have a choice? what if you had to live in a community that wanted to ban roadways and just have sidewalks everywhere? like, as an example if you were too poor to move? assuming you get my point can you predict the gotcha i'm going to have in my next argument? ~a[2023-02-08 15:11:34] - paul: "it seems obvious for the suburban life I live" how does this seem obvious? the suburbs are mostly going broke. ~a
[2023-02-08 14:49:14] - https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/24/politics/mccarthy-democrats-schiff-swalwell-intelligence-committee/index.html We haven't talked a lot about this, but under the "it's okay for us to do it because they started it and we can't just unilaterally demilitarize" theory of politics, this is fine, right? -Paul
[2023-02-08 14:44:16] - a: I accept that for some people, they prefer walking / biking / taking the metro and not bothering with a car. I'm not sure if you accept that for some people, they prefer the convenience of being able to drive places in bad weather and not having to wait 15 minutes for a bus or whatever. -Paul
[2023-02-08 14:41:49] - a: I know I've said this many times, but I do feel like our disagreements keep coming down to this one thing: I don't care if a group of people want to create pedestrian-topia where cars are outlawed and all roads are walkways for people and whatever. Go for it! I'm happy for you. But I don't think everybody (or even possibly most people) want that, and I certainly don't. -Paul
[2023-02-08 14:39:59] - a: I'm not sure how you run numbers on convenience. I can't speak for city life, but it seems obvious for the suburban life I live. And if you look at city dwellers, I do think they tend to be less likely to own and drive cars because of the point you are making. -Paul
[2023-02-07 20:55:17] - paul: sorry if i linked this already but it generally tends to be less efficient or convenient in the long run. (the hard numbers are in the youtube description section) if you have alternate numbers i'd love to read them. ~a
[2023-02-07 20:00:38] - paul: "Not even widespread bike paths" i usually try to focus on pedestrians and public transit. fuck bikes. ~a
[2023-02-07 20:00:14] - paul: "it generally tends to be more efficient and/or convenient for most trips" do you have any hard numbers for this? i have to imagine this can't be true for cities or suburbs depending ENTIRELY on how you define these things. for rural areas, i'll grant you the point. ~a
[2023-02-07 19:59:54] - a: Even the most efficient mass transit is still less convenient than a car. Not even widespread bike paths will make bikes faster than cars or better able to transport bunches of people with luggage in bad weather. -Paul
[2023-02-07 19:58:48] - a: Right, I'm sure there were some thumbs on the weights all around, but I generally think that most people prefer driving a car to walking / biking / subwaying / bussing because it generally tends to be more efficient and/or convenient for most trips. I don't think that would change significantly if we didn't have mandatory parking minimums or if metro was slightly less crappy. -Paul
[2023-02-07 15:49:17] - paul: (5. badly managed walkable areas. walkable areas used to be normal in the united states, but we lost them in the last hundred years: mostly in our parents' lifetimes. walkable area routes need to be useful, safe, comfortable, and interesting: tons of our walk routes do not follow this. 6. zoning laws that make walkable areas literally illegal to build 7. there are more, but i guess this would be a good start). ~a
[2023-02-07 15:49:11] - paul: they literally don't have a choice. the law basically forces people down the path of being lifelong drivers: the source for this is very long and includes multiple parts: (1. parking minimums. 2. yes, over-subsidising roads: not too much money per mile, but instead too many miles, total. i.e. driving routes are never circuitous, but walking often is. 3. undersubsidised public transportation. 4. badly managed public transportation.) ~a
[2023-02-07 15:49:06] - paul: no not really. but even if it was, "because the ... government forces them to by building roads" is fundamentally different than "people would bike more ... if they built more bike paths and less roads". the first one is missing the lack of choice and the second one at least contains the concept of choice. i wouldn't even *mention* bikes, but choice would be the cornerstone of my argument for why people drive cars. ~a
[2023-02-07 15:08:55] - a: I don't think you would answer that way, but isn't that at the heart of a lot of your arguments? That people would bike more (and drive cars less) if they built more bike paths and less roads? -Paul
[2023-02-07 15:08:11] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DZls7EIkbVk&t=174s If you like Mass Effect, and you like the Office, I think you'll like this. -Paul
[2023-02-07 05:58:47] - Paul: "because the evil government forces them to by building roads" isn't this just an obvious strawman? if you asked me why people drive cars, do you think i would answer this way? ~a
[2023-02-06 20:15:54] - yes. monday, tuesday, or wednesday. thanks! ~a
[2023-02-06 20:15:12] - a: You care about SC2 day? -Daniel
[2023-02-06 19:50:55] - a: But because cars are actually super convenient for most people and the lives they want to live. -Paul
[2023-02-06 19:50:38] - a: And I think that's okay, and I even suspect most people don't want that kind of community and most people aren't mindlessly driving cars because the evil government forces them to by building roads... -Paul
[2023-02-06 19:50:09] - a: Sure. I think I've pretty consistently been of the opinion that I don't care if some community wants to ban roadways and just have sidewalks everywhere. I just don't want to live in that kind of community. -Paul
[2023-02-06 18:52:14] - paul: yay, ok. not to . . . overplay my hand . . . but it doesn't need to be europe, right? if we were getting numbers like that in dc (it seems like we're not terribly far off), would you support it in dc? ~a
[2023-02-06 17:28:27] - a: I don't really know much about bike vs car usage in cities (especially European cities) and how to balance it. If the numbers support it, then sure! If the people want more bike lanes and fewer car lanes, then local governments should try to support that. -Paul
[2023-02-04 15:11:26] - paul: any thoughts on reducing car lanes in *very* *specific* situations where it very clearly demands it? "3 meter wide bidirectional bike lane ... moves 19,000 cyclists/day. The remaining 10 meter width moves 15,000 cars/day" i get the other situations i often opt for widening is a bit more of a gray area. but here this feels less gray does it not? ~a
[2023-02-03 18:00:47] - anyways, all this is to say that your analogy about the subway track and airport runway makes zero sense and has nothing to do with whether i want people to be able to walk wherever they want. ~a
[2023-02-03 17:59:30] - paul: when there's no sidewalk, when it's a rural area, when there's a crosswalk, even when there's no crosswalk in some locations you're literally allowed cross without needing a crosswalk. ~a
[2023-02-03 17:59:06] - paul: 2. i'm not sure how that matters for this scenario: you said "I'm skeptical of allowing pedestrians to use a road any more than I would be allowed to walk on a subway track or airport runway" and this is kinda just crazy talk, imo: pedestrians can and do use roads all the time, right? ~a
[2023-02-03 17:58:32] - paul: "I get you want people to be able to walk wherever whenever" 1. i don't think that is what i want. ~a
[2023-02-03 15:50:19] - a: I think the level of restriction on pedestrians using roads is a little different than the level of restriction of cars using roads, no? Like, I get you want people to be able to walk wherever whenever, but that's just not how things are right now. -Paul
[2023-02-03 15:40:58] - paul: "Not unrestricted, right?"
come on, use sane logic here, please. cars can't use the lanes unrestricted either. "495 during rush hour" maybe i should have specified, but i figured you were discussing non-highways. ~a[2023-02-03 14:42:28] - a: "roads are legal to walk on!" Not unrestricted, right? I mean, there are jaywalking laws and I'm sure the cops would frown on me walking down the middle of 495 during rush hour. -Paul
[2023-02-02 22:24:39] - mig: yeah read the article though. they mention tip a bunch, and he doesn't tip (or at least the implication is that his tip is low). ~a
[2023-02-02 21:53:50] - if this is including tip you can hit a specific bill amount pretty reliably. Though this is more than enough to prove intent to evade reporting requirements generally. - mig
[2023-02-02 21:52:29] - a: i think its been mostly established that george santo is probably a stupid criminal. - mig
[2023-02-02 15:55:34] - how are there not hundreds of new york prosecutors looking into someone spending $199.99 exactly, seven times, at an italian restaurant. considering $200.00 is where producing a receipt is mandatory. getting a bill like that is unlikely, as the article points out. instead it seems like something a stupid criminal would do. ~a
[2023-02-02 15:51:53] - paul: that's a terrible analogy. roads are legal to walk on! you are breaking the law walking on a subway track or airport runway. no, i was always totally fine with your other examples. ~a
[2023-02-02 15:50:22] - a: Sure, and I'm skeptical of allowing pedestrians to use a road any more than I would be allowed to walk on a subway track or airport runway, but that doesn't need to muddy the point I was trying to make about how even peaceful activities might warrant some restrained police force. My abortion clinic example might be the best one since I assume you would agree that blocking access to an abortion clinic might not be ideal. -Paul
[2023-02-02 15:30:29] - paul: agreed. people have the strong tendency to think that pedestrians can't "use" a road, only cars are allowed to "use" a road, so that's why you get the side-eye. ~a
[2023-02-02 15:23:23] - a: Yup. That's all I'm saying. And how do you judge "using" vs "blocking"? Like, what if a protest targets a specific highly trafficked bridge with no clear connection to the protest? Sure, they are using it, but they're also pretty clearly using it to block things to make the news. -Paul
[2023-02-02 15:18:59] - paul: oof, well 800,000 people legally protesting aren't blocking the streets, they're *using* the streets. but i agree, there *is* a lot of grey area: if you make 800,000 into 8,000 obviously the calculus changes. ~a
[2023-02-02 15:16:01] - a: Sure, there's always a lot of grey area, right? Like the trucker protest in Canada? At what point do 800,000 people legally protesting and blocking the streets become an untenable problem? -Paul
[2023-02-02 14:55:47] - paul: i posted. ~a
[2023-02-02 14:43:45] - paul: in my example it was the dc police who shut down the roads, not the protesters. ~a
[2023-02-02 14:39:09] - paul: yeah, except i agree on that point, so there's no need to refute it? if you're only there to deliberately block car drivers, i think removing a small number of people is fine. if you have 800,000 people in your protest and they shut down 38 roads, using "blocking car drivers" as an excuse for unrestrained force is terrible, probably illegal, and intentionally violent. ~a
[2023-02-02 14:30:50] - https://paulvsthemarket.com/fantasy-investing-2023/ I think I see Daniel's entry, but in case anybody else wanted to play... -Paul
[2023-02-02 14:29:30] - a: Or if you want to take it away from our eternal "Cars are evil / No they're not" debate, how about protestors who are blocking entrance to an abortion clinic? Or a school? Even if they're peaceful, I am fine with the police using restrained force to remove them. -Paul
[2023-02-02 14:28:29] - a: Eh, I largely don't have a ton of sympathy for protesters whose primary goal seems to be blocking streets. I mean, what if I parked in a bike lane and when the cops came to give me a ticket I tell them I am "protesting" bike lanes? They should definitely laugh in my face an hand me a ticket. -Paul
[2023-02-02 13:19:18] - deliberately blocking car drivers could sometimes be bad for the economy or environment or just plain annoying, but how is it not peaceful?! ~a
[2023-02-02 06:21:20] - If the guardian has the same definition of "peaceful" as CNN does, not much scientific in there to be sure. - mig
[2023-02-02 06:19:05] - And I won't call deliberately blocking traffic peaceful. - mig
[2023-02-02 06:15:18] - a: if it's legitimate protest gathering then, sure. If the primary goal is blocking traffic, I'm not so sure it's that legitimate. - mig
[2023-02-02 00:50:41] - this scene as an example. at least 5 blocks by 5 blocks were all closed down to cars before and after this picture. ~a
.jpg){kind=link}
[2023-02-02 00:46:37] - paul: yeah, i mostly agree on all your points. (except for the side-eye i give about blocking a road and needing to be forcefully removed. car drivers do not trump pedestrians when it's a legitimately large protest. i've been to fuck-tons of huge protests where they just close down *all* of the roads) ~a
[2023-02-01 21:10:04] - a: Or, what if the previous X BLM protests turned violent, but the current one isn't. That could partially excuse an initially harsher police response. I tend to agree, though, that if I had to guess, I would say it's like the police responses to left-wing protests would tend to be harsher. -Paul
[2023-02-01 21:08:41] - a: My first thought was that it could be due to differences in violence / lawlessness at the protests (which, the study did seem to note that left-wing protests were less peaceful), but I saw they controlled for that. It does feel like there could be a ton of difficult things to measure, though. Like, you could be peacefully blocking a road and need to be forcibly removed. Is that necessarily bad? -Paul
[2023-02-01 16:10:55] - i kinda doubt how scientific this was. but at the same time, i won't doubt, that if a more scientific study was done, similar results would be produced. ~a
[2023-02-01 14:22:06] - paul: i think there could possibly be a secondary effect? when chefs act unsafely, it's usually the people who eat the food get the bad side effects. whereas when delivery drivers act unsafely, it's usually the people who walk/bike on the street and public transit users that get the bad side effects. ~a
[2023-01-31 22:08:01] - paul: "wouldn't chefs be an out-group too" yes, this is true. maybe i worded everything badly, but like the chefs are an out-group but they also have nothing to be un-over-foregiven, so like, it's moot in that situation? ~a
[2023-01-31 22:02:36] - a: Ah, got it. Yes. I was misunderstanding / misreading the results. Thanks. That does make a certain amount of sense, but wouldn't chefs be an out-group too? I guess some people cook at home and might consider themselves chefs. -Paul
[2023-01-31 21:55:12] - paul: you are correct. but that was the issue exactly. in all the other questions, we see that people are very forgiving of people in cars. but in question 2, the two biases (being over-forgiving for people in cars, and being under-foregiving of out-groups) seemed to balance each-other out? that's why #2 seemed to show little difference? that is the conjecture, anyways. ~a
[2023-01-31 21:01:39] - a: Wouldn't them being an out group mean people are less forgiving of them? Or do I have the wrong type of out-group? -Paul
[2023-01-31 18:44:47] - i'm listening to a podcast with the researcher who did that study we were talking about two weeks ago: "Agreed that results in #2 are pretty similar" (from paul) the researcher mentioned that they were very surprised by this result as well (surprised that the results were so similar). they are surmising it's because delivery-drivers are part of an "out-group", but he admitted it needed further study. i hadn't considered this. ~a
[2023-01-30 17:18:23] - yup. thanks! ~a
[2023-01-30 17:12:00] - a / paul: Tonight work for SC2 for yall? -Daniel
[2023-01-30 16:49:48] - paul: "it's unlikely to be rush hour when we travel and it might be one person but it might be two, and the trips into DC are unlikely to be every day and more like once a week or twice a month or something" ok. you can pose a new scenario if you want. ~a
[2023-01-30 16:32:23] - paul: "I don't see how you can argue against the second point" i won't ever argue against the second point as you state it. but also i never said your ever-changing trip into dc would cost $50 or more, i doubt. i probably said something closer to: going from herndon to brookland using your car during rush hour would cost $50+, if you added up all of the costs. ~a
[2023-01-30 16:32:20] - a: But that's the thing, it's unlikely to be rush hour when we travel and it might be one person but it might be two, and the trips into DC are unlikely to be every day and more like once a week or twice a month or something. -Paul
[2023-01-30 16:31:26] - a: For the first point, I admit I had forgotten you had specified rush hour, as nearly all of my trips into DC the past 15 years have been non-rush hour. Would metro clearly be better during rush hour? I don't know. Maybe. I have so little knowledge of the tolls involved and how long it would take to drive. If this was a trip we were planning to do consistently for one person, we might lean towards metro for money saving long term. -Paul
[2023-01-30 16:28:32] - a: I don't see how you can argue against the second point. We never really dove deep into the parameters, and I admit I never made it clear we weren't going during rush hour, but I also think it's weird to assume that we would. Even if we went in during rush hour, the path we took had no tolls. The $16 or whatever from fuel and parking is the only direct money we spent. -Paul
[2023-01-30 16:26:46] - a: To clarify things a bit, I think we (both) keep mixing two different points: (1) Is going into DC during rush hour clearly better with the metro vs driving and (2) Will my trip into DC cost $50+ -Paul
[2023-01-30 16:24:10] - paul: you can just call it fuel. you keep calling it gas, and i'm not sure why. you pay for fuel, though i get that solar panels do make that calculation a bit harder. ~a
[2023-01-30 16:22:42] - a: So, yeah, if we paid tolls (which we didn't) and if we paid for "gas" (which we didn't) and if we use a depreciation per mile amount which is around 4-5x what google searches and my own experience suggests is reasonable.... then maybe we get close to $50 for our trip. -Paul
[2023-01-30 16:20:42] - paul: "paul's estimates vs adrian's estimates per day (herndon to brookland, 1 person, during rush hour, for 2 people divide by 2): fuel (adrian and paul 6), tolls (adrian 20, paul 0), parking (adrian and paul 10), depreciation (adrian and paul 17), maintenance (adrian 10, paul 0), taxes/lost investment income (adrian 0 until your kids get older, paul 0) total adrian 63 total paul 33. ~a" ~a
[2023-01-30 16:20:28] - a: And if you want to get into the weeds of calculating incremental maintenance and... taxes? Is there even any incremental taxation going on? Then I certainly want to start counting the cost of the entire metro system maintenance as well. -Paul
[2023-01-30 16:19:36] - paul: tolls are not $28. i quoted the price for tolls like three or four times. ~a
[2023-01-30 16:19:24] - a: And the 86 cents which is required to get my trip to $50. -Paul
[2023-01-30 16:19:04] - a: I have multiple data points backing up my number. Can it be wrong? Sure. But you have zero evidence backing up yours. I don't own an Ashton Martin Vulcan. Don't even know what that is. My ioniq is roughly twice the price my Camry was when both were new. You want to double the 8 cents then? Seems reasonable. That's till 16 cents, which is still a ton less than the 63 cents or whatever you originally quoted... -Paul
[2023-01-30 16:16:55] - a: and 25 cents still doesn't get you to $50. It adds another $11 or so and brings the total to ~$22, which is still less than half. We didn't pay tolls, but even if I grant you that.... what are tolls? We had two people, do we still pay? I find it hard to believe tolls are $28 -Paul
[2023-01-30 16:16:34] - paul: use the aston martin vulcan as an example. if i buy an aston martin vulcan, do you think i should use 8 cents per mile as my deprecation value? ~a
[2023-01-30 16:14:52] - i have a feeling like you'd hate to work at an accounting firm. you gotta amortize everything. "8 cents, which is what a number of sources on Google states, seems more reasonable" it uses an average price of a car. you can use that value if you want, but it's the wrong answer? ~a
[2023-01-30 16:13:56] - a: Which is why I think 8 cents, which is what a number of sources on Google states, seems more reasonable. It also matches with my one data point of my Camry, which sold with ~100k miles and lost ~$10k in value. -Paul
[2023-01-30 16:12:59] - a: https://www.carsdirect.com/used-car-prices/why-does-a-new-car-lose-value-after-its-driven-off-the-lot Except that 40 cent number misses the amount lost simply by going from new to used. Even if we assume a 10% drop (which is lower than this article suggests), that would turn the 40 cents a mile depreciation into negative cents. -Paul
[2023-01-30 15:40:09] - sure. 40 cents, 25 cents, i guess i don't care too much: like you mentioned, it'll get better with time. it's just definitely not 8 cents? anywho, 25 cents is how i got to 50/day. count the tolls for a rush-hour day, amortize the maintenance, and you're there. ~a
[2023-01-30 03:42:02] - a: If you go by the sale price, then... maybe 40 cents per mile? If my math is right. But again, that's in the first year when massive depreciation should be expected regardless of miles driven. -Paul
[2023-01-30 03:40:59] - paul: i used this to get $.25 for your car: https://caredge.com/depreciation . . . but i guessed on some of the details. ~a
[2023-01-30 03:39:48] - https://www.carfax.com/vehicle/KM8KRDAF6NU098715 Anyway, this looks close to my car? If the "$60,710 CARFAX Value" is to be believed, then I guess the depreciation is something like half a cent per mile? -Paul
[2023-01-30 03:39:47] - paul: "the past year or so is weird for car values" true, it'll be a bit messy, but i'm sure you can get a round number more accurate than $.08 per mile. ~a
[2023-01-30 03:39:00] - paul: you can account for that? the old price, the new price, subtract them, then divide by the number of miles? ~a
[2023-01-30 03:37:59] - a: Yeah, but don't cars infamously lose a huge percentage of value the instant you drive it off the lot, regardless of miles driven? Also, you keep mentioning how the past year or so is weird for car values? -Paul
[2023-01-30 03:30:40] - paul: "I only have one data point to use to judge how reasonable depreciation costs are" you don't have one data point. you can look up the current cost of your ioniq. ~a
[2023-01-30 03:30:24] - yes i know that. you amortize the maintenance because it's a cost? ~a
[2023-01-30 03:29:17] - a: "your camery can't and won't have the same depreciation per mile as your much more expensive car" Right, which is why I said it might work for the Ioniq. Unfortunately. I only have one data point to use to judge how reasonable depreciation costs are. -Paul
[2023-01-30 03:28:27] - a: Yeah, sorry, we didn't go during rush hour. You do know metro is more expensive during rush hour too, right? And charges parking? Why would I amortize taxes and maintenance I would be doing anyway? Do I get to amortize the entire cost of the metro system on the other side then? -Paul
[2023-01-30 03:22:37] - paul: "Camry being worth negative money after 100k miles" i already replied to this logic: your camery can't and won't have the same depreciation per mile as your much more expensive car? would we assume that the aston martin vulcan has the same deprecation per mile as a 1982 honda civic? ~a
[2023-01-30 03:19:58] - $17 depreciation for today's 45 mile trip would be 38 cents per mile? That is a little more reasonable, I guess, although that still ends up with my Camry being worth negative money after 100k miles. Might work for a more expensive car like the Ioniq. -Paul
[2023-01-30 03:18:54] - rampantdiscourse.com. ~a
[2023-01-30 03:18:17] - but the rampantdisourse.com link describes it better. ~a
[2023-01-30 03:17:06] - paul: tolls ($50 was for during rush hour, you can't just ignore rush hour if you're going to use $50), maintenance (amortize this), taxes (amortize this). ~a
[2023-01-30 03:15:43] - paul: there's the other costs. ~a
[2023-01-30 03:14:59] - "that is close to what is required to get a drive into DC costing $50" no. ~a
[2023-01-30 03:14:45] - a: Which I know is not something you suggested, but as I laid out in today's trip, that is close to what is required to get a drive into DC costing $50 -paul
[2023-01-30 03:14:29] - paul: no, nothing close to $1 per mile makes any sense for depreciation for your current car. ~a
[2023-01-30 03:13:47] - a: I honestly don't know the proper formula, and was leaning on Google search results to educate me. I really doubt that anything close to $1 per mile makes any sense, though. -Paul
[2023-01-30 03:09:25] - ironically? ~a
[2023-01-30 03:09:08] - yes. ~a
[2023-01-30 03:09:07] - a: Ironically, written by Matt Herndon, so not surprising you two agree on car depreciation numbers.
-Paul[2023-01-30 03:08:44] - a: https://rampantdiscourse.com/car-free-tempe-baby/ Is this what you mean by "rampantdiscourse numbers"? I've been trying to figure out what you're talking about since this is the first I've heard of it and this is my best guess. -Paul
[2023-01-30 02:21:32] - paul: on here you wanna just look at one or two of the costs, but on rampantdiscourse you seem to state that there's like, a lot of costs, man, and why stop and one or two: why not add them all up? ~a
[2023-01-30 02:19:44] - on rampantdiscourse, you don't actually say how you calculate your depreciation. but, i assume you take the old value of your car and subtract the new value? i guess maybe it'd be better if i just left it to the experts: i agree with most if not all of the things you said in that post, and this entire conversation has been me badly (very badly) trying to parrot shit i learned in that post? ~a
[2023-01-30 02:15:00] - a: Granted, I almost never consider going into DC during rush hour.... or at least haven't in like two decades. And admittedly, back when I did, I DID ride the metro. But my workplace was literally like a block from Rosslyn station. -Paul
[2023-01-30 02:13:51] - a: "i'm not sure i ever said that going from springfield to brookland during non-rush-hour a metro would be faster or cheaper." Sure, rush hour the numbers are undoubtedly different. I'm just saying metro has never seemed to be clearly superior to driving to me. -Paul
[2023-01-30 02:11:00] - a: It's not like I ignored depreciation. In fact, I specifically called out what would be necessary to get to the >$50 trip you thought it would be. If you want to make it $17, that's fine, it makes the trip cost $28.43, which is still far from $50. -Paul
[2023-01-30 02:10:43] - paul: ok, but going with $0/mile seems a bit of a stretch too, right? can we at least use the rampantdiscourse numbers? ~a
[2023-01-30 02:09:41] - a: "is there a reason you dropped off the $17 deprecation?" I tried to stick to actual, concrete, no doubt numbers from today. That was the exercise. We had estimates that ranged from 8 cents to 86 cents a mile, which is a huge difference. -Paul
[2023-01-30 00:54:56] - paul: "An increase of roughly 40% in cost but 40% decrease in time?" i'm not sure i ever said that going from springfield to brookland during non-rush-hour a metro would be faster or cheaper. ~a
[2023-01-29 22:39:53] - i got pretty used to walking in the rain after living at virginia tech for four years. ~a
[2023-01-29 22:38:12] - paul: is there a reason you dropped off the $17 deprecation? if this had been during rush-hour, how much would your tolls have been? ~a
[2023-01-29 21:10:57] - a: Random aside, it was raining, so it was nice not having to walk to and from the metro. -Paul
[2023-01-29 21:10:41] - a: So I suppose driving this trip cost us $3.43 more, but it also took us around 30 minutes less time? An increase of roughly 40% in cost but 40% decrease in time? Seems close to a coin flip to me. -Paul
[2023-01-29 21:08:14] - a: I plugged in what a trip from Franconia/Springfield (closest metro to my parents) to Brookland/CUA leaving around 9am this morning and WMATA says it would be $2 in fares one way (so $4 a person, or $8 total for us) and take 84 minutes. -Paul
[2023-01-29 21:05:11] - a: So taking the non-free number, that works out to $1.43 for "gas", plus the $10 parking for $11.43. In order for our trip to ultimately cost > $50, it would require depreciation of roughly $0.86 a mile, which is pretty close to that $1 figure you said I was straw-manning you about. -Paul
[2023-01-29 21:03:03] - a: 13 kWh either costs us $0 (we still have free DC fast charging which we have been almost exclusively using) or $0 (from solar panels) or $0.11 per kWh (from Dominion if we use more than we produce). -Paul
[2023-01-29 21:02:15] - a: Tolls: $0. Parking: $10. We drove 45 miles total with an efficiency of 4.0 mi/kWh driving in and 3.3 mi/kWh heading back. "Gas" (we took the EV so technically electricity): Around 13 kWh. -Paul
[2023-01-29 21:00:20] - a: Okay, the official results are in: Our trip was from my parents' house (we dropped the kids off) into the Brookland area on a Sunday morning where we stayed for roughly 3 hours. We also got a tiny bit lost going there and did a little exploring on the way back. -Paul
[2023-01-27 20:15:10] - ok, i totally lied, i still care a shit-ton. paul's estimates vs adrian's estimates per day (herndon to brookland, 1 person, during rush hour, for 2 people divide by 2): fuel (adrian and paul 6), tolls (adrian 20, paul 0), parking (adrian and paul 10), depeciation (adrian and paul 17), maintenance (adrian 10, paul 0), taxes/lost investment income (adrian 0 until your kids get older, paul 0) total adrian 63 total paul 33. ~a
[2023-01-27 19:26:07] - paul: "Maintenance has to be done regardless" aren't most maintenance schedules per mile? "you can't pin the entire cost of owning a car on a single trip" how am i doing that? isn't this how amortization always works? you take a cost and divide that shit out. i understand that if you have your car idle otherwise, that's one thing. . . . anyways, i kinda don't care anymore . . . i fully admit you shouldn't ever take the metro. ~a
[2023-01-27 19:13:33] - a: "aren't you missing tolls and maintenance and loss of investment income in this calculation?" No. We don't intend to pay any tolls. Maintenance has to be done regardless. I don't even know what loss of investment income means. Again, you can't pin the entire cost of owning a car on a single trip. -Paul
[2023-01-27 19:09:16] - paul: "$17 of additional depreciation. $10 parking + $6 "gas" + $17 depreciation = $33 " aren't you missing tolls and maintenance and loss of investment income in this calculation? ~a
[2023-01-27 19:07:50] - paul: "using pretty much all your assumptions (most of which I disagree with), it's far less than $50, even for one person". how do you figure that? ~a
[2023-01-27 19:07:19] - paul: the $.25/mile is for your ioniq, not your camery. right? ~a
[2023-01-27 19:06:55] - paul: "I am owning this car regardless of if we drive it to DC this weekend or not. Taxes will be paid regardless" right but as i've mentioned a few times, if your alternative is to have your car sitting idle, you can ignore this cost. if you have other drivers in your family, you should not. ~a
[2023-01-27 19:06:14] - a: You say we got lucky with our Camry, but if we used 0.25 per mile of depreciation, then our Camry would be worth near $0 at the time we sold it. I don't think we got THAT lucky. -Paul
[2023-01-27 19:04:26] - a: So, again, using pretty much all your assumptions (most of which I disagree with), it's far less than $50, even for one person. -Paul
[2023-01-27 19:03:43] - a: But even if we use your metric, that comes out to something like $17 of additional depreciation. $10 parking + $6 "gas" + $17 depreciation = $33 -Paul
[2023-01-27 19:03:00] - a: We should be talking about incremental depreciation, not the overall cost of a car. I am owning this car regardless of if we drive it to DC this weekend or not. Taxes will be paid regardless. The only issue to consider is how much additional depreciation adding something like 60-70 miles is going to cause. I feel like that's why the $0.08 metric I quoted gives. -Paul
[2023-01-27 18:25:11] - paul: $.25/mile.
~a[2023-01-27 18:24:26] - paul: i plugged your info into a calculator and it literally spit out $25/mile. (40k to 37.3k over a 1 year period, with 10k miles per year). ~a
[2023-01-27 18:22:11] - paul: if anything, the thing i'm ignoring is good for your argument, since your car is new. ~a
[2023-01-27 18:21:24] - paul: i think you probably got lucky with the camry, but event 15/100 is much larger than $.08. ~a
[2023-01-27 18:20:28] - paul: totally agreed. but $.08 is nowhere near the right number for a car that costs more than 50k, right? you wanna ignore the starting price of the car and i want to ignore the non-linearity of depreciation: i think i'm ignoring something much much smaller than you are? ~a
[2023-01-27 18:20:09] - a: I mean, again, we sold our Camry with ~100k miles on it and it had lost maybe $15k in value. But it would've lost a lot of value even with like 0 miles on it. It's not all based on miles. -Paul
[2023-01-27 18:18:25] - a: "your car is 50k new?" We paid more for it, but $50k is a fine estimate. "will it still be useable at 200k miles?" Hopefully? But I'm not sure what the point of picking that number is. "that's $.25/mile, is it not?" I don't think that's how depreciation works. It's not a flat line, and I don't think the car will be worth $0 at that point. -Paul
[2023-01-27 18:16:40] - a: Maybe I was using non-rush hour before? Not sure. Sorry. Not sure it makes a huge difference to me. $16 was like the exact cost I estimated for what our trip this weekend will cost for parking + "gas". -Paul
[2023-01-27 18:15:51] - paul: your car is 50k new? will it still be useable at 200k miles? that's $.25/mile, is it not? ~a
[2023-01-27 18:13:00] - a: https://www.directcarbuying.com/blog/what-mileage-does-a-cars-value-start-to-depreciate Why not 8 cents? -Paul
[2023-01-27 18:12:05] - paul: well . . . ok, well i was using your numbers for the metro. sorry? ~a
[2023-01-27 18:11:35] - a: Sorry, I was wrong, it's $6 per person one way, so it's $24 for metro for two people. -Paul
[2023-01-27 18:11:12] - paul: 50 isn't inflated, paul. what number would you prefer per mile for depreciation and maintenance and taxes? ~a
[2023-01-27 18:09:56] - a: "it'll be over 25/day, which is still leaps and bounds more than metro" Even taking your inflated $50 price for granted.... this is not true. Metro fares alone would be like $16 for two people. That's not counting driving to the metro station and parking there. -Paul
[2023-01-27 18:08:49] - a: Then maybe the metro looks better, but I still think counting those things takes it away from "clearly" to "toss-up" territory AND I maintain that was never part of the initial calculus of you asking: "during rush-hour do you think a car can get you from herndon to brookland quicker or cheaper than the metro?" (although in fairness to you, you did note "during rush-hour", which I mostly forgot about). -Paul
[2023-01-27 18:07:30] - paul: "abstract things like impact to environment" there's nothing more concrete than the impact you're having on the environment, but (imo) you don't have to count this if you're looking at the price. ~a
[2023-01-27 18:06:23] - paul: $16 for tolls+gas+parking?! during rush-hour aren't you going to get over 15 with tolls alone? link. which route are you taking? ~a
[2023-01-27 18:06:12] - paul: nah, when i said over $50/day i was counting just you in the car. if you want a passenger, it'll be over 25/day, which is still leaps and bounds more than metro. ~a
[2023-01-27 18:06:08] - a: And maybe that should be what I hang my hat on. I don't know if I've driven into DC by myself more than maybe once in the past decade or two. It's almost always with multiple people. So, yeah, when we run the numbers we typically come out to: It'll take about the same amount of time, the cost is about the same. That's why I call it a toss-up. Sure, if you pay up for tolls and want to count abstract things like impact to environment. -Paul
[2023-01-27 18:03:38] - a: But for the record, we'll have two passengers, which by itself should blow this whole convo out of the water. -Paul
[2023-01-27 18:03:10] - a: Or maybe $0.50. I'm getting mixed up if we're talking about 1 or 2 passengers and one way or round trip now. -Paul
[2023-01-27 18:01:48] - a: And I'm saying in order for us to pass $50 for this trip, you're going to need to have something approaching $1 per mile in maintenance/depreciation costs because the concrete costs of tolls+gas+parking is going to be like $16. -Paul
[2023-01-27 18:01:06] - paul: i don't have to. but i will anyways. ~a
[2023-01-27 18:00:45] - a: Look, if you have to pull in indirect and abstract concepts like health and the environment to bolster your claim that metro is cheaper and faster... then I think it's fair to say it's not "clearly" superior in both of those. -Paul
[2023-01-27 17:59:43] - paul: i'm confident, if you seriously try to count fuel, maintenance, depreciation, parking, tolls, taxes, and loss of investment income you'll pass 50/day and 25/day if you have one passenger. ~a
[2023-01-27 17:59:23] - a: "i never did this and you know it." Bad phrasing on my part. I was trying to say you would have to make it $1 per mile to make the trip cost $50+ -Paul
[2023-01-27 17:58:30] - a: "not $0 during rush hour" Okay. I don't think I've driven to DC during rush hour.... in years? Ever? I dunno. I can pretty confidently say I very rarely pay tolls when driving into DC and I don't intend to pay it this weekend. -Paul
[2023-01-27 17:57:35] - paul: "If you want to count added depreciation costs of like $1 per mile" a fucking terrible strawman: i never did this and you know it. ~a
[2023-01-27 17:55:52] - paul: "throwing in things like 'health' and 'environment' is just as off-topic" i don't think so. paying panhandlers is entirely optional. giving yourself problematic long-term health issues and ruining the environment is not optional. ~a
[2023-01-27 17:54:12] - paul: "Speed is a wash" this is only true if you spend money on tolls. i do feel like we've gone over this before. ~a
[2023-01-27 17:52:53] - paul: "Maintenance and depreciation: I don't know what slight marginal cost that would be for an extra 20 miles of driving" you can just divide the cost by the number of miles you drive and multiply by the miles. it's the only "fair" way to do this because, yes, you don't get that cost back if you don't drive those miles: BUT you can use the car for other things unless you don't have other drivers in your family. ~a
[2023-01-27 17:50:37] - paul: "Could be $0 or.... more?" what? the route you quoted "Google maps claims 40 minutes to 70 minutes to drive" is not $0 during rush hour. ~a
[2023-01-27 17:36:13] - a: But if I search for "depreciation costs per mile" in google, the first two results I see indicate 8 cents or 12.5 cents per mile is more reasonable. -Paul
[2023-01-27 17:34:51] - a: You think $50 driving into DC is a pipe dream? I guess we'll find out. We're planning on driving into DC this weekend. I'll log as much info as I can and let you know the cost. I'm very confident that "gas" (either gasoline or electricity) costs + parking will be significantly less than $50. If you want to count added depreciation costs of like $1 per mile? Then sure, maybe we can get to $50 for the trip. -Paul
[2023-01-27 17:32:09] - a: but is also less convenient. -Paul
[2023-01-27 17:31:48] - a: If we're including unrelated stuff like physical health benefits (which I still don't buy for metro), then I think it's fair to include the downsides of metro rides too. I know you disagree, but I find the experience of riding the metro FAR worse in many ways than driving. Feels less safe. Feels dirtier and unhealthier. Having to walk from the metro station to where you actually want to go might be better for you physically... -Paul
[2023-01-27 17:29:06] - a: "yeah, i don't think you can include panhandling into your costs" I kind of agree with you, but at the same time I feel like throwing in things like "health" and "environment" is just as off-topic. At least giving money to panhandlers is an actual monetary cost that is more associated with the metro vs driving. Health and the environment isn't a direct monetary cost. -Paul
[2023-01-27 17:25:36] - a: When I go into DC, it is rarely by myself. Usually I'm going with at least one other person if not the whole family. -Paul
[2023-01-27 17:25:08] - a: Speed is a wash. Price seems comparable for a one-off trip (with a ton of variables like parking) and probably slanted towards metro if we're talking about multiple trips over the long term. If I had to choose between "clearly" and "toss-up" with that, I would say it's a toss-up, especially since this is all based off the one person math that is more favorable to you and not the two person math that would factor into things for me. -Paul
[2023-01-27 17:23:07] - a: Price? Long term, sure, it might be slightly cheaper. But again, you didn't say: "When accounting for long term impacts to health and environment, is metro better? You asked if I could drive into DC faster/cheaper than taking the metro, and my response was: "I know you probably intend that as a gotcha, but I'm honestly not sure [...] it looks like a genuine toss-up" I stand by that. -Paul
[2023-01-27 17:20:41] - a: "for all of the metrics (economy, health, and price) it seems like metro is a clear winner" I won't argue environment because I legit don't know and would assume (hope?) that public transit would be better there. Health, I disagree, because mental health is a thing AND I can't imagine it's healthier to be exposed to the same air hundreds of people are breathing. Did we already forget about COVID? -Paul
[2023-01-27 17:18:50] - a: "can you include maintenance,depreciation,parking,tolls?" $13 does include parking ($10). Tolls I don't even know how to count since it depends on when and what route to take. Could be $0 or.... more? Maintenance and depreciation: I don't know what slight marginal cost that would be for an extra 20 miles of driving. A couple of dollars? I feel like we've been over all of this already. -Paul
[2023-01-27 17:10:28] - a: To be fair to the planning board, it's not like I had any interest in being in higher density. I like owning my plot of land. -- Xpovos
[2023-01-27 16:59:35] - xpovos: "I have to drive to the train station" yeah, that's basically how wmata (this might also apply to amtrak/vre, i dunno) has really failed the most: fostering higher density near metro stations has never been a priority. ~a
[2023-01-27 16:49:58] - mig: ok. ~a
[2023-01-27 16:49:31] - a: I think we saw at least 3 jumpers both ways. We asked the station attendant about it and she said yeah it happens a lot and since she doesn’t have a gun she wasn’t going to try and stop anybody. - mig
[2023-01-27 16:49:04] - xpovos: thanks! i quoted 50/day to paul (to get from herndon to brookland, dc using a car) and he thought i was crazy, but with 20/day in tolls, and 10/day in depreciation, 10/day in maintenance, 15/day in parking, and 10/day in fuel: 50/day is actually a bit of a pipe-dream. ~a
[2023-01-27 16:45:42] - a: Driving looks a lot more expensive because of all of the sunk costs, which aren't really fair to the comparison because I'd have to pay those anyway. But try to do it apples to apples for you. -- Xpovos
[2023-01-27 16:44:50] - The cost of the pre-Metro PT is so high because it's VRE, which is not subsidized as heavily. -- Xpovos
[2023-01-27 16:44:35] - That's also per day. -- Xpovos
[2023-01-27 16:44:21] - a: best guess approximation of total cost of driving same route as I use PT (note there's a non-zero, but relatively small amount of driving involved in the PT route I use as well. There is NO fully-PT option available because of where I live and when I have to commute [stupid early] so I have to drive to the train station.) = 54.37 -- Xpovos
[2023-01-27 16:03:13] - xpovos: why does it cost so much to get to the metro? also do you have a similar breakdown of your costs for driving that includes all those things i mentioned (fuel, maintenance, depreciation, parking, tolls, taxes, loss of investment income, etc)? thanks! ~a
[2023-01-27 15:55:25] - a: No, Union Station. (Not my only station to notice it, but it's a major one I use). I definitely saw far fewer gate jumpers at Springfield. And essentially zero panhandlers. Take that for what it's worth. -- Xpovos
[2023-01-27 15:54:15] - xpovos: "It feels like as much as 20% of the population riding has jumped the gate" uh really? you notice this at the franconia stop? i think it'd be funny if you and i get on and off at the same stop going different directions. i'll have to keep an eye out for you. ~a
[2023-01-27 15:53:00] - a: That's rarer, but it has happened. Multiple times. -- Xpovos
[2023-01-27 15:52:45] - a: I'll affirm mig's point about gate-jumping as well. It feels like as much as 20% of the population riding has jumped the gate. That must be over-stating it, but it is clearly rampant. Metro has also recently put up signs basically begging people to pay their fare, rather than jump. -- Xpovos
[2023-01-27 15:51:29] - yeah, i don't think you can include panhandling into your costs
for what it's worth i never get accosted by panhandlers ON the metro. ~a[2023-01-27 15:50:38] - Not a cash outlay for me, but I do also get accosted by panhandlers due to Metro, and if I were to give them money, that might factor into my overall costs. I get accosted by panhandlers while driving, too, but differently. -- Xpovos
[2023-01-27 15:49:43] - a: Daily Metro use: $8.30 (2x $4.15 trips). Not Metro also has $17.14 (2x $8.57) to even get to the Metro. If I did monthly passes, these costs go down on the per-day basis, but it requires a certain number of daily uses to break even (somewhere between 3 and 4 per week on average). Total cash public transit commute costs: $25.44/d -- Xpovos
[2023-01-27 15:47:00] - a: I can give my Metro costs. Attempting to get my driving costs (if I did) is much harder, but I'm sure we can find an approximation. -- Xpovos
[2023-01-27 15:39:49] - paul: economy=environment, i often make that mistake, sorry. ~a
[2023-01-27 15:39:15] - paul: can you give me your (money) costs for car and metro? "Total metro cost is $17 for a day... $13 for an EV drive", can you include maintenance,depreciation,parking,tolls? for all of the metrics (economy, health, and price) it seems like metro is a clear winner. time is the only metric where it's even remotely close, and if you try to get the price to be closer, time isn't anywhere near to being close either. ~a
[2023-01-27 15:38:55] - a: But I'm with Miguel. Riding the metro is almost always a pretty miserable experience for me. Don't get me wrong, driving into DC is often a pretty miserable experience too, but there are definitely times I would prefer sitting in my air conditioned car listening to a podcast while stuck in bumper to bumper traffic versus smushed up against dozens of sweaty people in a hot metro car during rush hour. -Paul
[2023-01-27 15:37:08] - a: I stand by my statement that there is very little evidence it is faster. Cheaper? Maybe, if you wanted to look at a long haul cost including depreciation and whatnot. But generally when I am trying to decide if I should drive or metro into DC for a Nats game, I'm counting metro fares, parking, and gas. I don't dive deeper into depreciation of my car or years taken off my life because of sitting in a car or whatnot. -Paul
[2023-01-27 15:35:01] - a: "yes i did. and for the most part it cannot" (It's so funny we are having this conversation since Gurkie and I are literally discussing which option makes more sense to go to this place in DC this weekend and comparing time and cost). All I have been saying this entire time is that the metro is not clear better by the metrics of cheaper or faster. -Paul
[2023-01-27 14:48:34] - mig: "miserable fucking experience to take metro" so you're talking about the 15 minute wait times on the weekend and . . . having to watch people jump the gate? or is there something else you haven't stated here? ~a
[2023-01-27 14:47:35] - mig: "the amount of people brazenly jumping the gate" i have literally never seen this, but i'll admit it probably happens in some stations more than others. "how long we had to wait for a train (15-16 mins)." yeah that's expected on the weekend, sadly. "Not to mention the horrible mantainence issues it's been having for the last couple years" yeah i've never witnessed this either, but i have read plenty of stories, and it sounds bad ~a
[2023-01-27 14:14:46] - It's a better option to get to DC depending on where you are going (especially if your destination is near a metro stop). But to me, it's always been a miserable fucking experience to take metro, and I'm certain I'm not alone here. -mig
[2023-01-27 14:13:31] - I dunno metro is kind of depressing. The first 2 things Michelle and I noticed when we took it to see you guys at dinner was 1) the amount of people brazenly jumping the gate 2) how long we had to wait for a train (15-16 mins). Not to mention the horrible mantainence issues it's been having for the last couple years. - mig
[2023-01-26 22:03:43] - paul: "I would never describe riding the metro as mentally healthy" everyone i work with who takes the metro as often as i do agrees: you can use the time you used to take driving to do much more uplifting things. you can read stuff on your phone instead of . . . worrying about vehicular manslaughter of children? ~a
[2023-01-26 22:01:16] - paul: "I don't know how 'green' the metro is." they don't drive on rubber tires: the pm2.5&pm10 that steel wheels put out is way less than rubber tires. they do use regenerative braking. their co2 per passenger-mile is much lower obviously (the source i saw was roughly half: 48% lower co2e using wmata's metro). "I would NEVER describe the metro as efficient transportation" do you compare this to driving on roads inside the beltway? ~a
[2023-01-26 21:44:10] - paul: if i tell google to avoid tolls entirely at 8:30am, it says 1:00 to 1:40. i'm not sure you can come close on time if even try to come close on price. ~a
[2023-01-26 21:31:00] - paul: i also walk from the metro or the bus stop when i take the metro (or metro+bus) to work. ~a
[2023-01-26 21:29:07] - paul: "How is sitting on the metro more physically healthy?" this one is well documented, and there are lots more links where that one comes from. basically, i think it's that we're required to walk more, which has this obvious silver lining. i walk to my bus when i take the bus to work. ~a
[2023-01-26 21:20:10] - paul: yes i did. and for the most part it cannot. driving, it's roughly the same speed (strictly not quicker) and more expensive (not cheaper) if you account for all of the costs. ~a
[2023-01-26 21:19:05] - paul: me for instance: i have a car that's from 2004. i imagine if i had been driving it 15k miles each year, it would be trash by today. depreciation isn't exactly the same amount per day regardless. ~a
[2023-01-26 21:18:23] - a: "you like to look at all sides of an issue" Sure, although I would say in judging the best way to get from A to B that 90% of it is going to involve speed and expense. But also, this was all because you said: "do you think a car can get you from herndon to brookland quicker or cheaper than the metro?" You specifically laid out these two criteria. -Paul
[2023-01-26 21:17:17] - paul: but if you have more people than cars, then it's not like the other option is always your car sitting idly at home. regardless taxes are small, and depreciation does NOT happen the same regardless of if you drive it or not. ~a
[2023-01-26 21:16:22] - a: Like, I am paying taxes on my car whether I drive into DC this weekend or not. I am owning my car regardless. It's depreciating either way (although I admit at different rates). -Paul
prev <-> next