GM and Chysler Bankruptcies

[--Pete]

Hi,

One {"required people to live closer to their work"} is hopeless, and violates free association.

Not to mention that since people often change jobs, or at least job sites, it is impractical. I worked for Boeing in the Seattle area. I worked at three different sites in fifteen years, and I knew people that had worked at more. I was fairly lucky in that the closest site was only eleven miles away, the furthest twenty-three. I could have easily had a forty plus mile commute (each way).

The only thing that idea would have accomplished is to make the real estate agents rich.

Two {"implement a massive transit system"} is a good idea, but that ship has sailed for most major American cities, and would take quite a lot of effort to reverse.

The cities that have good transit systems paid for them in money and inconvenience long ago, but pay for them they did. It might be harder to do it now (I'm not sure that is true), it might be more expensive (again, I don't think so in constant dollars). The question isn't can we afford to do it now, the question is can we afford to wait. Because it *will* be a lot more expensive and a lot more inconvenient when it has to be done in a rush, as an emergency measure, because the other options are gone.

Three {"tax gasoline at much higher levels"} is a fantastic idea.

Yes. At least to the level of maintaining the existing infrastructure. Preferably to the level of funding 'two' above:)

Four {"take over GM"} would be useless, . . .

And gets your Libertarianism card revoked :whistling:

--Pete