|
|
| Re: Waiting for proof (315594) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > BusChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: Waiting for proof |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Tue Jul 5 14:42:29 2016, in response to Re: Waiting for proof, posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jul 1 19:17:20 2016. "That does not say a driver's time is worth more than a bus rider's time."The "conditional" argument that you make makes your views clear. "The point I was making was that DOT is only considering the value of a bus passenger's time and ignoring the time of car and truck drivers." There is no evidence whatsoever that they are. That said, they SHOULD value that of bus riders higher as they do not have the same negative cost to society. "There are many more car and truck drivers and passengers than there are bus passengers and they are losing more time than is gained by bus passengers." There is no reason to believe this is true. "So when EVERYONE's tine is considered the total amount of minutes lost is greater than the total amount of minutes gained making SBS on Woodhaven a poor idea." It does no such thing. "I repeatedly stated everyone's time needs to be treated EQUALLY." Yet you repeatedly complain when anybody tries to do so. "Then I added IF YOU WANT TO MAKE THE CASE, that a bus rider's time is worth more than the tine of someone in a passenger car, it WOULD BE POSSIBLE to make a counter argument that a driver's tine is worth more because their income's are higher." That you consider such to be a possible argument makes it pretty damn clear that you are elitist scum. "I never was making that argument. I SIMPLY WAS STATING THAT THAT ARGUMENT COULD BE MADE." No, by making the statement, you were literally making the argument. "You clearly are reconstruing what I stated by ignoring that it was a CONDITIONAL statement, and not something I was advocating." Your weasel-phrasing has no effect on the obvious intent. |
|
|
|