Bernie defends Castro

[Alan Klein]

You really need to get a sense of humor. 

[kers]

In USA, there are some highway stretches with 80 mph (129kmh) speed limit - in Idaho, Montana, Nevada, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, and Wyoming you can still find fast and almost deserted roads. The highest posted speed limit in USA is on the Texas State Highway 130 - 85 mph (137 km/h).
In Europe, there are quite a few countries with 130kmh limits on their main highways.

In the Netherlands we go back to 100KM/h because of pollution norms.

[Alan Klein]

In USA, there are some highway stretches with 80 mph (129kmh) speed limit - in Idaho, Montana, Nevada, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, and Wyoming you can still find fast and almost deserted roads. The highest posted speed limit in USA is on the Texas State Highway 130 - 85 mph (137 km/h).
In Europe, there are quite a few countries with 130kmh limits on their main highways.

Driving in the American Southwest was neat with I think 80mph on some New Mexico, Utah or Arizona highways.  Years ago, speed limits were slowed down to save gasoline after the oil "shock".  Eventually, states have upped the limits again.  What happens is if the speed is too slow, people will drive faster anyways since they feel comfortable with the higher speed with the road they're on.  Depending on the state, police usually allow higher speeds of let's say 10mph over the speed limit.  They won;t ticket you unless you go faster.  I got stopped by a Connecticut State Trooper doing 90mph (145kmh) in a 65mph zone, although traffic was going 75mph.  I got distracted.    In any case, it's costing me more now for car insurance as they keep the infraction on your records for five years.

[Craig Lamson]

Driving in the American Southwest was neat with I think 80mph on some New Mexico, Utah or Arizona highways.  Years ago, speed limits were slowed down to save gasoline after the oil "shock".  Eventually, states have upped the limits again.  What happens is if the speed is too slow, people will drive faster anyways since they feel comfortable with the higher speed with the road they're on.  Depending on the state, police usually allow higher speeds of let's say 10mph over the speed limit.  They won;t ticket you unless you go faster.  I got stopped by a Connecticut State Trooper doing 90mph (145kmh) in a 65mph zone, although traffic was going 75mph.  I got distracted.    In any case, it's costing me more now for car insurance as they keep the infraction on your records for five years.

80 mph on a 70 mph interstate zone is pretty normal fare it seems.  100mph, not unheard of on some western interstates.  Not that I would know personally...

[LesPalenik]

Talking about transportation - Luxembourg, as the first country in the world, offers now free public transportation on buses, trams and trains to ease the traffic congestion.

It has had months of hype and now finally Luxembourg's free public transport has begun. With a population of only 614,000, it may be one of Europe's smallest countries and the idea is not unprecedented. But the "free mobility" drive has captured the imagination. Buses, trams and trains are now free to ride on and you don't need a ticket.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-51657085

[Rob C]

Talking about transportation - Luxembourg, as the first country in the world, offers now free public transportation on buses, trams and trains to ease the traffic congestion.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-51657085

I can see that free tram travel could become more popular; I often used to use trams and buses in the 50s as alternative to the Raleigh, and the buses were especially nice if you got a good seat up top. Great views, and had I had a reasonable camera back then, perhaps a good vantage position for street pix. The trams I remember as more noisy and given to much sway.

I think that Edinburgh has been toying with reintroducing trams, and if memory serves, it has become a very expensive exercise. Public ventures invariably do, as the proposed new rail link from London to the northern sticks proves. The public purse makes contractors salivate.

Rob

[Alan Klein]

Talking about transportation - Luxembourg, as the first country in the world, offers now free public transportation on buses, trams and trains to ease the traffic congestion.

It has had months of hype and now finally Luxembourg's free public transport has begun. With a population of only 614,000, it may be one of Europe's smallest countries and the idea is not unprecedented. But the "free mobility" drive has captured the imagination. Buses, trams and trains are now free to ride on and you don't need a ticket.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-51657085

Well, they only need two buses.

[LesPalenik]

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-51657085

Well, they only need two buses.

Also, it's easier for them to pay for it, since the Luxembourg GDP per capita is $100,000 whereas in USA it is only $59,500.

[Alan Klein]

Also, it's easier for them to pay for it, since the Luxembourg GDP per capita is $100,000 whereas in USA it is only $59,500.

Why would people who earn that kind of money want to take a bus? 

[LesPalenik]

Good question.
I guess driving in Luxembourg is no fun, they have most cars in Europe per capita.

[Alan Klein]

Good question.
I guess driving in Luxembourg is no fun, they have most cars in Europe per capita.

So who's taking the bus there?  Free or otherwise?

[LesPalenik]

So who's taking the bus there?  Free or otherwise?

Shooters?

[Alan Klein]

Reminds me of California where they want to spend $50 billion on high speed trains between LA and San Francisco.  Of course the only things on those trains will be cattle.  Everything else drives or will fly between those two cities.  What a waste of money.

[LesPalenik]

It's a nice drive in good weather and if you have time. Otherwise, it is just another 6 hour drive. And you have to watch out for the cattle trucks in front of you.
High-speed train could cut the travel time to less than half.
Elon Musk's Hyperloop train would do it in 35 minutes at $20/ride. Much better use of money than flying to Mars.

[Alan Klein]

$50 billion just to build.  How much to support every year?  How many passenger per billion?  I'd rather invest in Kodak. 

[Ray]

Once a government can claim you have a "responsibility", that's just an excuse for your loss of individual liberty. 

You have a "responsibility" to support and not to criticize your government and vote for the parties they put on the ballet. Where's your free speech then?

Not true. You have a responsibility to support 'Democracy' and uphold the law, as in most Democratic countries. There is no law against criticizing the government in Australia, and there is no country that has 'complete' freedom of speech without legal consequences.

Even in America, if you insult someone by making defamatory comments which are not true, you can be taken to court and suffer very expensive consequences. Is that 'freedom of speech'?

The law for compulsory voting was introduced in Australia as a result of an extremely low voter turnout in the 1922 federal elections. As a result of the new law, the turnout at the next election in 1925 rose to over 91%.

Article 29 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that 'rights and freedoms' are subject to 'duties to the community', including the 'just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society'.

There are many things that people do not wish to do and which they would not do if they were able to exercise 'individual freedoms', but which parliament has legislated to require. The role of parliament in a parliamentary democracy includes passing laws to ensure the effectiveness of that democratic system.

Voting can be considered as a civic duty comparable to other duties, such as paying taxes, compulsory education, and jury duty.

[Alan Klein]

Not true. You have a responsibility to support 'Democracy' and uphold the law, as in most Democratic countries. There is no law against criticizing the government in Australia, and there is no country that has 'complete' freedom of speech without legal consequences.

Even in America, if you insult someone by making defamatory comments which are not true, you can be taken to court and suffer very expensive consequences. Is that 'freedom of speech'?

The law for compulsory voting was introduced in Australia as a result of an extremely low voter turnout in the 1922 federal elections. As a result of the new law, the turnout at the next election in 1925 rose to over 91%.

Article 29 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that 'rights and freedoms' are subject to 'duties to the community', including the 'just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society'.

There are many things that people do not wish to do and which they would not do if they were able to exercise 'individual freedoms', but which parliament has legislated to require. The role of parliament in a parliamentary democracy includes passing laws to ensure the effectiveness of that democratic system.

Voting can be considered as a civic duty comparable to other duties, such as paying taxes, compulsory education, and jury duty.

First, lying about someone personally is different than political speech.  Showing your displeasure with a slate of candidates by not voting is not the same as libelling someone is a thief. As one supreme court justice said, yelling fire in a crowded theater when there isn't one is not protected free speech. 

Regarding the right of free speech, it's memorialized in our constitution that is the social compact of America.  Other duties you listed such as paying taxes is  something our government can do.  There's no constitutional limitation on government to require jury duty or have compulsory education.  But there is a constitutional prohibition on government limiting free speech. 

Certainly you can differ in how you wish to run your rights and limit them in Australia.  That's up to you.  But in America, we find that the right of free speech is constitutionally protected and very broad and encompasses the right to not vote as an expression of free speech.  Remember too that Americans fought a seven year brutal war for complete independence from the British crown.  So the enumerated freedoms in our constitution are very precious to us.  Especially when it came to political speech and being able to speak our minds against government.  Australia on the other hand followed the British system more closely.  Plus your "independence" wasn't so dramatic, still being part of the British crown.  So there's more deference to government.  Americans are more rebellious.   

[Ray]

Showing your displeasure with a slate of candidates by not voting is not the same as libelling someone is a thief.

I see a lot of confusion here, Alan. 'Not voting' is not necessarily showing displeasure. It's not showing anything at all specific, without further investigation of the reasons why a particular person did not show up to vote. There can be many reasons why a person doesn't bother to vote, such as sickness, being out of the country at the time, having total apathy regarding politics, not having total apathy but having a more important issue to attend to at the time, and so on.

The Australian system with compulsory voting provides a better method for the non-voters to explain why they didn't vote, because they get a letter after the election asking why they didn't vote. If they have an acceptable reason, such as sickness, which requires evidence from a doctor, they don't have to pay a fine. If they don't have an acceptable reason to avoid paying the fine, they still have the opportunity to state the real reason they didn't vote, if they want to.

Have I successfully demolished your argument? 

[LesPalenik]

$50 billion just to build.  How much to support every year?  How many passenger per billion?  I'd rather invest in Kodak.

AFAIK, the cost for the 350 mile tunnel and everything else needed was estimated at $14 billion.
For comparison, building of the 1776 miles long section of the Transcontinental railway in 1869 cost $60 million or about $1.2 billion in today's money. Construction of that rail track changed America. Building the Hyperloop between SF and LA would also change America.

https://www.history.com/news/transcontinental-railroad-changed-america

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... Have I successfully demolished your argument? 

Not in the slightest.

Why I did or didn’t or for whom is none of your or anyone’s else business. I don’t want to explain myself to anybody, open a letter, respond to it, lick a stamp, pay a fine... I did what I wanted to do, or not, and that is nobody’s business. That’s the American way. Not the fascist, socialist, totalitarian regimes in Europe and Down Under, where people are not individuals, but subjects of the queen or state. Thanks God that the oceans, common language, and Smiths separate us.