<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: My Own Brand Of Hell</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.codedread.com/blog/archives/2005/06/20/my-own-brand-of-hell/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.codedread.com/blog/archives/2005/06/20/my-own-brand-of-hell/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Sep 2010 13:56:50 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Robert</title>
		<link>http://www.codedread.com/blog/archives/2005/06/20/my-own-brand-of-hell/comment-page-1/#comment-169</link>
		<dc:creator>Robert</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Nov 2008 08:52:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=108#comment-169</guid>
		<description>The US&#039; infrastructure was built at precisely the moment when autos were ascendant and oil was cheap and abundant.  Now, the US is importing over 60% of its oil, and even if people wanted to take the train...they can&#039;t.  It might seem obvious to state this, but in the US I believe that it needs to be said: land use dictates the viability of rail.  Most US downtowns, let alone suburbs, are too spread out for rail to be of use.  How and when will this change?  It will change when those rivers of people driving --to work/school/to the supermarket/big box/driving just about everywhere -- begin to go bankrupt. In fact, this is already happening: much of the external debt that the US racked up over the last two or three decades has been for oil.  Ingeniously, this extravagance (and heedlessness) was paid for by selling shares in suburban real estate overseas.  When will the situation change?  It is already changing, but look to 2012-2015 to be a critical period, one in which oil not only increases exponentially in price, but one during which spot shortages appear.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The US&#8217; infrastructure was built at precisely the moment when autos were ascendant and oil was cheap and abundant.  Now, the US is importing over 60% of its oil, and even if people wanted to take the train&#8230;they can&#8217;t.  It might seem obvious to state this, but in the US I believe that it needs to be said: land use dictates the viability of rail.  Most US downtowns, let alone suburbs, are too spread out for rail to be of use.  How and when will this change?  It will change when those rivers of people driving &#8211;to work/school/to the supermarket/big box/driving just about everywhere &#8212; begin to go bankrupt. In fact, this is already happening: much of the external debt that the US racked up over the last two or three decades has been for oil.  Ingeniously, this extravagance (and heedlessness) was paid for by selling shares in suburban real estate overseas.  When will the situation change?  It is already changing, but look to 2012-2015 to be a critical period, one in which oil not only increases exponentially in price, but one during which spot shortages appear.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rob</title>
		<link>http://www.codedread.com/blog/archives/2005/06/20/my-own-brand-of-hell/comment-page-1/#comment-168</link>
		<dc:creator>Rob</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Jun 2005 16:52:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=108#comment-168</guid>
		<description>I think it was really the last line that sold me. Internet access is nice, but a sip of scotch makes the trip desirable.
I remember in Ottawa they had a lot of access for bikes and public transit looked good. Public transit in the city is one thing though and transit between cities is another. I&#039;ve always said that Canada should have a much bigger interest in paving more of the country. I love the natural scenery and all, but if people can&#039;t get to it then the country&#039;s economy can&#039;t benefit from it. Canada should be dumping more funding into more airports, railways and highways because there&#039;s so much ground to cover. It would go a long way to helping solve national unity issues as well. I think there&#039;s a problem when it&#039;s cheaper for me to travel my own country by flying through someone else&#039;s.
As for I94, I just close my eyes and try not to think about it. Well, not when I&#039;m driving it. Usually.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think it was really the last line that sold me. Internet access is nice, but a sip of scotch makes the trip desirable.<br />
I remember in Ottawa they had a lot of access for bikes and public transit looked good. Public transit in the city is one thing though and transit between cities is another. I&#8217;ve always said that Canada should have a much bigger interest in paving more of the country. I love the natural scenery and all, but if people can&#8217;t get to it then the country&#8217;s economy can&#8217;t benefit from it. Canada should be dumping more funding into more airports, railways and highways because there&#8217;s so much ground to cover. It would go a long way to helping solve national unity issues as well. I think there&#8217;s a problem when it&#8217;s cheaper for me to travel my own country by flying through someone else&#8217;s.<br />
As for I94, I just close my eyes and try not to think about it. Well, not when I&#8217;m driving it. Usually.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
