I suggest Ms./Mr. Williams make sure what he/she has ingested clear his/her system before the next column. The last bus I rode almost asphixiated me from the diesel fumes leaking into the it. I am still recovering my hearing from my last EL ride where the woman behind me was screaming into her cell phone demanding to know "Where Bed and Beyond at?" while the high school kids in front of me kept yelling at each other.

On second thought, I'll have what he/she is having...

If trains are inconvenient, dirty and noisy, buses are those things raised several notches.

Convenient?

My last bus ride was from central Vermont to Bridgeport (CT), a distance of less than 200 miles. Four changes with waits of 30 minutes to a couple of hours was required each time. Mercifully I've forgotten how long it actually took.

People on the bus were pleasant, but people on super market lines and the local pizzeria, not to mention gas stations and rest stops along the road, are, in the main, pleasant too.

It takes a special kind of nut to suggest that we give up the comfort and convenience of our cars in order to hobnob with our fellows. Why not give up central heating and meet our fellow citizens in the woods while we all search for kindling together.

Sheesh, I hope if our cars are ever snatched away, I'm safely on the other side of the big divide. Surely another bus ride would kill me.

Statists love building mass transit that no one will actually use. Here in Charlotte, the light rail system (a single line that runs one or two cars every 15 minutes N-S) is giddy that they are getting 10,000 riders a week. Many other moderately sized cities are the same. Perhaps the mass transit will take off if gas goes to $4.00 or $5.00 a gallon, but for probably 3/4 of the commuters in most of those cities, the lines don't go where the people need them to go.

It's those bloody statists again - they wouldn't know where to put a railroad if you drew it on a map for them.

Statists want people on mass transit, real American individualists want cars.

OJ wants mass transit so that he can control where people go.

Hitler, Robert Moses, and the last general elected president were the great highway builders. It requires a statist/authoritarian mind.

Make motorists bear their costs and the train will make money.

Gas stations don't even have attendants anymore, too much human contact...

Proles pondering the progress in the war with Eastasia while sipping Victory Gin ride mass transit. No thanks.

Passenger trains never made money in the US. They were subsidized by freight revenues, and were dumped as soon as possible. There's no way that BNSF, CSX, CN, Union Pacific or Norfolk Southern are going to make that mistake again.

Gas stations don't even have attendants anymore, too much human contact...

You need to get out more. Visit Oregon, where you'll find the gas stations of your dreams. Well, almost, as the encounters were in English instead of broken Español.

As for "statists" loving cars, you need to cite examples. Well, a single example will do. I think we'd all love to entertained by your stories of how cars were adored in Albania or North Korea or the Soviet Union.

And I think the Nazi rule applies to the Autobahn, as that was built to move troops around quickly, as even they figured out that railroads just weren't mobile enough for modern warfare and had too many bottlenecks and limitations.

Statists do build nice highways. Nobody's claiming statists always do everything badly.

And, of course, mass transit means your movements are at the mercy of a public employee union. Talk about "statist."

OK, Jim Hamlen says
"Statists love building mass transit that no one will actually use. Here in Charlotte, the light rail system (a single line that runs one or two cars every 15 minutes N-S) is giddy that they are getting 10,000 riders a week. Many other moderately sized cities are the same."

Fact check here, it is 13,000 per day, not 10,000 per week. The light rail in Charlotte runs every 7.5 minutes, not every 15 minutes. You are entitled to your opinion, not your facts.

If they can't make up facts they can't defend cars.

The purpose of cars is to atomize. Moving troops quickly is a benefit.

They were never dumped. The feds decided against them and built highways. The State can always crush private business.

The (single) car runs every 15 minutes - CATS is trying to run 2 cars every 7.5 minutes during rush hour, but that hasn't been fully implemented. I was wrong about the number of riders - it is about 10,000 a day (not a week) - I couldn't remember from the radio story I heard a couple of weeks ago. One funny anecdote - the ticket machines are so confusing that every day there are people left staring at them, unsure about what to do. Supposedly new machines will be ordered. For now, new signs will have to do.

Ridership is rising since last December, but the break-even point is beyond the capacity of the system (or the pocketbooks of the riders).

Moving troops quickly? Isn't that what aircraft are for? I doubt if any train took any soldier to Baghdad. Or Kuwait. Or Afghanistan. Or Panama. Or the Mog.

Or are you referring to some sort of domestic troop action (you statist you). :>)

I'll go for a bicycle before I do public transport. I refuse to be held hostage to someone else's timetable. Besides, a group that shares transportation does not automatically become more friendly. Nor do more friendly people automatically take public transport. Case in point, the only time in the last year that I've taken a ride on a train, the entire car consisted of business people reading their newspapers/magazines/books, or using their computers/music players/cell phones.

Exactly the sort of self-absorption the Statists are hoping for!

"A sense of self-importance takes hold of the driver as his BMW rushes to pass in the wrong lane, indifferent to the harm his actions may cause."

Bimmer envy. Cry me a river. Typical socialist journalist who can't afford a fast car and thinks everyone should have to suffer with him on horrid public transportation.

Ain't. Gonna. Happen.