it's time for our law makers...

[Dan Schultz]

You can put the blame for all the trucks on the highways directly on the shoulders of General Motors Corporation. They put the railroads out of the freight business so they could sell their trucks and busses.

[bort]

By the way, what is the status of our rail system? That is, existing highways are widened, and new highways are considered/built pretty often. However, at least around my neck of the woods, I'm not sure I've seen or heard of any new rail lines being built. Is it that we're pretty much using what we have, but not making anything new?

[windshieldbug]

By the way, what is the status of our rail system?

Last I heard, we were investing in getting a person to Mars, instead...

[Matt G]

I've brought this up in the past...and (again, as in the past) nothing meant against "truck drivers" or Schlep, but it seems to me that

18-wheel truck rigs should mostly move freight within 20-30 mile radiuses.

Trains should be piggy-packing all of these containers from major center to major center.

Rather than destroying-rebuilding-destroying-rebuilding-destroying-rebuilding-destroying-rebuilding-destroying-rebuilding our highway system......due to huge trucks...

...Why not develop/redevelop our rail system (enhancing some right-of-ways to as many as 4-6 tracks...!!!) and have 1/200th of the people (and perhaps 1/50th of the fuel) moving this stuff between major centers and not on the highways!!!

Obviously, one the stuff reaches the major centers, we'll need the 18-wheelers (still quite a few folks, but driving much shorter distances) to move the containers to specific areas...

...which might not at all alleviate your big-city commute.

Everyone who has posted here needs to read Ted Leavitt's "Marketing Myopia".

He forcasted nearly 40 years ago the problems of the railways. It isn't GM who put them out of business, it is the railways themselves that caused their market to crumble.

[Dan Schultz]

...... It isn't GM who put them out of business, it is the railways themselves that caused their market to crumble.

Read the history about the evolution of trucks, busses, and automobiles in the US. It's clear to see that GM had a MAJOR part in the demise of the railroads. Fact is, GM actually bought railroads and closed them. They also bought electric streetcar systems and sent them packing in order to put busses on the streets.

[MaryAnn]

Well, while I'm laughing at your spelling of "busses" ... (I think you meant, uh, "buses") ....
capitalism might actually work if it were allowed to, that is to have the market actually drive things, instead of having special interests control the markets. But I may be starting to venture into the dreaded "politics"...
e.g., I have a co-worker who will only buy an American car; he sees that as patriotic. I see it as preventing market forces from causing American-made cars to come up to the standards of the Japanese car I just bought.
MA

[Dan Schultz]

Well, while I'm laughing at your spelling of "busses" ... (I think you meant, uh, "buses") .... I have a co-worker who will only buy an American car; he sees that as patriotic. MA

Yeah.... it's 'buses' About the 'American car' bit... there is no such thing as an American car any more. Even the Ford Crown Victoria doesn't contain enough domestic parts to classify it as a domestic car. There are major Japanese parts on EVERY domestic automobile.

I spent the last 20 years of my automation 'sales engineer' career calling on automotive clients. It strikes me as funny that GM/UAW won't allow employees to park foreign cars in prime spaces in employee parking lots when all the GM cars contain lots of foreign parts.

[Chuck(G)]

Yeah.... it's 'buses' About the 'American car' bit... there is no such thing as an American car any more. Even the Ford Crown Victoria doesn't contain enough domestic parts to classify it as a domestic car. There are major Japanese parts on EVERY domestic automobile..

But some of those "Japanese" parts are made in the USA; many Denso products, for example, (think wires, air conditioners, dashboard instrumentation, etc), are made in Tennessee.

If ownership, however, is the criterion, then Jeep, Dodge, Chrysler, etc. are verboten because they're owned by a German company (Daimler).

Stick that in your Chinese (Nanjing) Range Rover!

[MaryAnn]

Well, of course not "all" truck drivers are any particular way more than "all" car drivers are any particular way. It just bugs us more when truck drivers do it.

But I do remember a couple years ago on the freeway trying to go somewhere...one truck decided to pass another truck on a long upgrade. The truck doing the passing was going maybe 24 mph and the one being passed was doing, oh, 23 mph. Of course I am exaggerating on the speeds but the relative speeds are accurate; like, if two cars were doing that at least it wouldn't take as long because cars are shorter. I sort of wanted the bazooka launcher in that instance. And...it wasn't the first time, by a long shot.

MA

[ThomasDodd]

it was about the ignorance of some truck drivers who wish to camp out in the hammer lane (left lane). Yes, there are ignernt truckers who will pick a lane and stick with it forever.

I though y'all had to go to school and learn how to drive those things. I guess they don't do any better than the most drivers traing schools.

[Doug@GT]

my truck is computer limited to 65MPH

Is that common? If so, the problem might be alleviated by educating drivers that big trucks can't just speed up and go around them. I wonder if the morons who keep the trucks from getting back over are actually sitting there wondering why the stupid truck driver doesn't speed up and get around them.

I would just think that if you're going slow enough that a truck computer limited to 65 MPH has to pass you, then you will be loathe to go any faster to let them get over. Likewise, you would probably be aware that you are going slower than most folks, which is why you're in the right lane to begin with. But if you knew the truck couldn't do more than 65, you'd understand why he seems to be camping to your left, and then you'd either slow down or speed up to let him get back over.

[ThomasDodd]

I wonder if the morons who keep the trucks from getting back over are actually sitting there wondering why the stupid truck driver doesn't speed up and get around them.

No. I doubt those morons notice the truck is there.

you'd understand why he seems to be camping to your left, and then you'd either slow down or speed up to let him get back over.

Again you giving the morons WAY, WAY too much credit.

[Kevin Hendrick]

I've heard rumor to the effect that our state police are not allowed to run over 85 MPH unless they have a cattle truck escort.

Ah, "running with the bulls", eh?

[MaryAnn]

Well, not being funny any more...about a month ago some friends of mine, who travel the country with the Phantom of the Opera road show (horn player,) were on I10 E. of Tucson pulling their Airstream, as the show moved from Phoenix to Houston. As they went over the crest of a hill, a semi passed them at a *great* rate of speed, the trailer started fishtailing in the backwash, and eventually they rolled. Everything was a complete loss, the trailer, which was their home, and their Suburban that they towed it with. They were extraordinarily lucky to get by with minor injuries.

So the truck speed thing IS dangerous. The truck driver of course either never looked back or didn't care to stop.

MA

[JCalkin]

riding a trucks bumper doesn't have the same effect if you were riding a cars bumper

No, but it does save gas.

Hooray for fuel conservation!