Monday, May 14, 2007

How to be the toast of the Oregonian

Did you catch the not-so-subtle propaganda in the Saturday Oregonian, in the nauseating article about the Willamette University graduate whose legacy at the school is the volunteer bike repair shop she got started on campus?

The article breathlessly reports how the young lady wants to change everybody's lifestyles so that they don't use cars. And her aspiration is to go work for a local government so she can do so much good using the coercive powers of government to change people's behavior.

From the article:
Selser wants to make mass transit -- buses, trains, streetcars, subways -- sexy enough to make Americans drive less. If that doesn't sound sexy, listen to Selser.

"It's so much more than putting a (transit) line there. It has to be planned well. There have to be workplaces along the lines. You have to make the stops attractive. . . .

"It needs to be a lifestyle change. For people to change their lifestyles, they need to have the infrastructure."


Her post-college aspiration?

She would love to work for the city of Eugene or the Lane Transit District, "where I can actually start doing something," she says.

I shudder to think what it means for this young woman to be "doing something."

Can you imagine the Oregonian ever writing such a fluff piece about a young college graduate whose aspiration is to start, say, a manufacturing company and employ people?



5 comments:

Anonymous said...

Your analysis is devastating. No, The Oregonian would never have the piece you propose for them.

Another little socialist in the making.

Does she know how much misery can be attributed to people who shared her zeal for designing how other people shall live their lives.

No, because the poor little thing would shudder in horror and say,"I'm not like that at all."

So were the good intentions of all the others who wanted a "new society."

It's the righteous ferver, that leads to unmerciful behavior.

She sure seemed to have no doubts about her calling.

Here's to hoping she has doubts in this world.

Mick said...

I don't see where she says that she is going to force anybody to change their lifestyle. She merely wants to make alternative transportation attractive to others. Since this will get more people off of the roads, I would think the people who want to drive cars would be in favor of it.

Am I missing something?

Anonymous said...

Mick, it would be fine if she wanted to provide road transportation as well. But most mass transit proponents want to force you out of your car by not building roads, so the misery of sitting in traffic builds until you leave your car.

You say,"but she is giving you choice." But experience says people don't give up their car when given that choice, even with misery, 97% of people still drive cars. Maybe with just a little more misery people will decide to get out of their cars.

Won't Socialists ever give up trying to change human behavior? No.

They will just keep increasing the misery index until they do.

Whoopi, it's going to be fun.

Your choice:

Changing your behavior by causing misery,Vs. changing your behavior by supplying choice and pleasent experience.

She also wants to plan for where other people use their property as opposed to letting them decide where they use their property.

Accurate said...

Mick -
The way that she (and others like her) will make 'alternate forms of transportation' more attractive is on the backs of automobile drivers and taxpayers. Just as now Sam 'the tram' Adams is using a small percentage of funds that should be going for street repair instead for bikes; and just as all businesses in the Metro area have to pay a tax for light rail (regardless of if light rail does a thing for their businesses) - that type of thinking just grows. They continue to abscond with money that should improve roads for automobiles and trucks for 'alternative modes of transportation'. Once the revenues from automobiles starts to decrease (one of their goals met, get people out of cars) then they start increasing some other tax or they come up with a totally new tax so they can continue to fund the black hole called 'alternative transportation'. If you want to ride a bike, do it, but pay for the bike lanes (I'm not referring to recreational biking). If you want to ride MAX do it, but pay the full cost of your ride (last estimated to be $20 per ride). Quit making it seem like 'alternative modes of transportation' are so much cheaper and 'better for the world'. Be honest and show the entire cost of 'alternative modes of transportation'.

Sheesh.

Doc M, phd said...

Just what we need, another person in the cart instead of pulling the cart.