it caused more wrecks but somehow it is safer?

I;m noticing whenever the politicians or Police Chiefs put the political
statement the cameras are a success. Studies and facts say otherwise

http://www.murfreesboropost.com/red-...-000-cms-22151

On Feb 3, 1:28*am, Lil Abner > wrote:
> I;m noticing whenever the politicians or Police Chiefs put the political
> statement the cameras are a success. Studies and facts say otherwise
>
> http://www.murfreesboropost.com/red-...ate-248-000-cm...


You believe the politicians? That's like believing Republicans are
actually going to create jobs instead of giving tax breaks to the
wealthy.

On 2/3/2011 10:16 AM, WC Smith wrote:

> You believe the politicians? That's like believing Republicans are
> actually going to create jobs instead of giving tax breaks to the
> wealthy.

Amazing! Didn't Obama promise -only- 8% unemployment if the stimulus
was passed? Where are we at - 9.5%? And for how long now? 16 months?

Didn't Obama give money to car companies that sent jobs overseas and
closed plants and dealerships in this country? That's more than tax
breaks to the wealthy. That's handing them cash - much of which we will
probably never get repaid.

Republicans won't do anything either. But to sit there and sound like
they are the only ones that will do it proves how distant from reality
you are.

On Feb 3, 7:54*pm, Rich Piehl >
wrote:
> On 2/3/2011 10:16 AM, WC Smith wrote:
>
> > You believe the politicians? That's like believing Republicans are
> > actually going to create jobs instead of giving tax breaks to the
> > wealthy.
>
> Amazing! *Didn't Obama promise -only- 8% unemployment if the stimulus
> was passed? *Where are we at - 9.5%? And for how long now? *16 months?
>
> Didn't Obama give money to car companies that sent jobs overseas and
> closed plants and dealerships in this country? *That's more than tax
> breaks to the wealthy. *That's handing them cash - much of which we will
> probably never get repaid.
>
> Republicans won't do anything either. * But to sit there and sound like
> they are the only ones that will do it proves how distant from reality
> you are.

Obama NEVER "promised" anything. He and his advisors (like ANY
President) tried to implement policies to improve the unemployment
picture - without knowing exactly how damaged the economy was so no
precise response was possible.

The Republicans, FWIW, said that their 2001 tax cuts would generate
more than enough revenue to offset the drop in revenues to the budget
but they were wrong .... instead we got 1.5 trillion deficit but the
Republicans STILL INSIST that cutting taxes works... so how dumb are
they?

On Feb 3, 2:28*am, Lil Abner > wrote:
> I;m noticing whenever the politicians or Police Chiefs put the political
> statement the cameras are a success. Studies and facts say otherwise
>
> http://www.murfreesboropost.com/red-...ate-248-000-cm...

when a change is made to many roads now days, they put up a sign
saying "new traffic pattern" because they know that until the users of
that road get used to the change - that accidents may result.

It's not only the NUMBER of accidents - it's the TYPE of accidents -
property damage, personal injury, deaths, etc AND the pattern - over
time.

If someone does a COMPREHENSIVE STUDY of a new red light camera - over
time - and at the end of the test period - it is demonstrated that the
total costs and severity of the accidents is WORSE then take the
camera out but lets get the comprehensive data first and I'm betting
that in 90% of the cases - the costs, severity, and personal injury
and deaths is going to be LOWER.

If that turned out to be the case - would you THEN ....SUPPORT the use
of red light cameras?

On 2/5/2011 6:23 AM, Larry G wrote:
> On Feb 3, 7:54 pm, Rich >
> wrote:
>> On 2/3/2011 10:16 AM, WC Smith wrote:
>>
>>> You believe the politicians? That's like believing Republicans are
>>> actually going to create jobs instead of giving tax breaks to the
>>> wealthy.
>>
>> Amazing! Didn't Obama promise -only- 8% unemployment if the stimulus
>> was passed? Where are we at - 9.5%? And for how long now? 16 months?
>>
>> Didn't Obama give money to car companies that sent jobs overseas and
>> closed plants and dealerships in this country? That's more than tax
>> breaks to the wealthy. That's handing them cash - much of which we will
>> probably never get repaid.
>>
>> Republicans won't do anything either. But to sit there and sound like
>> they are the only ones that will do it proves how distant from reality
>> you are.
>
> Obama NEVER "promised" anything. He and his advisors (like ANY
> President) tried to implement policies to improve the unemployment
> picture - without knowing exactly how damaged the economy was so no
> precise response was possible.

>
> The Republicans, FWIW, said that their 2001 tax cuts would generate
> more than enough revenue to offset the drop in revenues to the budget
> but they were wrong .... instead we got 1.5 trillion deficit but the
> Republicans STILL INSIST that cutting taxes works... so how dumb are
> they?

Well then couldn't the same thing be said about Republicans that you
just said about the Democrats?

quote:
> (like ANY
>> President) tried to implement policies to improve the unemployment
>> picture - without knowing exactly how damaged the economy was so no
>> precise response was possible.

"Lil Abner" > wrote in message
...
> I;m noticing whenever the politicians or Police Chiefs put the political
> statement the cameras are a success. Studies and facts say otherwise
>
> http://www.murfreesboropost.com/red-...-000-cms-22151

Interesting how a stationary camera that snaps photos when the sensor is
tripped is attributed to the cause of wrecks? The camera isn't driving.

Instead, it is the drivers not being diligent enough to watch the stale
green while preparing to slow, in order to stop when the light turns yellow.
If the driver is too close to the limit line when the light turns yellow, it
is easy enough to proceed through the intersection before the light turns
red and the camera grace period expires. Exceeding the posted speed limit
is, no doubt, another contributing factor.

On Feb 5, 12:31*pm, Rich Piehl
> wrote:
> On 2/5/2011 6:23 AM, Larry G wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Feb 3, 7:54 pm, Rich >
> > wrote:
> >> On 2/3/2011 10:16 AM, WC Smith wrote:
>
> >>> You believe the politicians? That's like believing Republicans are
> >>> actually going to create jobs instead of giving tax breaks to the
> >>> wealthy.
>
> >> Amazing! *Didn't Obama promise -only- 8% unemployment if the stimulus
> >> was passed? *Where are we at - 9.5%? And for how long now? *16 months?
>
> >> Didn't Obama give money to car companies that sent jobs overseas and
> >> closed plants and dealerships in this country? *That's more than tax
> >> breaks to the wealthy. *That's handing them cash - much of which we will
> >> probably never get repaid.
>
> >> Republicans won't do anything either. * But to sit there and sound like
> >> they are the only ones that will do it proves how distant from reality
> >> you are.
>
> > Obama NEVER "promised" anything. He and his advisors (like ANY
> > President) tried to implement policies to improve the unemployment
> > picture - without knowing exactly how damaged the economy was so no
> > precise response was possible.
>
> > The Republicans, FWIW, said that their 2001 tax cuts would generate
> > more than enough revenue to offset the drop in revenues to the budget
> > but they were wrong .... *instead we got 1.5 trillion deficit but the
> > Republicans STILL INSIST that cutting taxes works... * so how dumb are
> > they?
>
> Well then couldn't the same thing be said about Republicans that you
> just said about the Democrats?
>
> quote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > *(like ANY
> >> President) tried to implement policies to improve the unemployment
> >> picture - without knowing exactly how damaged the economy was so no
> >> precise response was possible.

I don't think either party can "promise" specific results from
stimulus or tax cuts (which are also stimulus if you think about it).
For two years - on your taxes - right now there is a $400 credit
called "making work pay".

It's a tax rebate. Would you care to guess how effective this has been
(or not)? After all.. it IS a tax cut, right?

On Feb 5, 12:36*pm, "Daniel W. Rouse Jr."
> wrote:
> "Lil Abner" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
> > I;m noticing whenever the politicians or Police Chiefs put the political
> > statement the cameras are a success. Studies and facts say otherwise
>
> >http://www.murfreesboropost.com/red-...ate-248-000-cm...
>
> Interesting how a stationary camera that snaps photos when the sensor is
> tripped is attributed to the cause of wrecks? The camera isn't driving.
>
> Instead, it is the drivers not being diligent enough to watch the stale
> green while preparing to slow, in order to stop when the light turns yellow.
> If the driver is too close to the limit line when the light turns yellow, it
> is easy enough to proceed through the intersection before the light turns
> red and the camera grace period expires. Exceeding the posted speed limit
> is, no doubt, another contributing factor.

this is pretty easy. You put up one of those portable signs that says
" red light camera is operating NOW" BEFORE they get to the
intersection. I am in complete favor of totally making it crystal
clear that a camera is operating.... so there are no excuses....
If you get told there is a camera and you slam on your brakes and the
guy behind you ALSO knows there is a camera operating... then no
sympathy here... ticket them both - and keep dong it until they learn.

I'd make the first ticket a "warning" ticket and the 2nd on a $25 fine
and the third one a $100 fine and points and the 4th one a $1000 fine
and loss of license.

I guarantee you that it would change behaviors.

In article >,
Rich Piehl > wrote:
>On 2/3/2011 10:16 AM, WC Smith wrote:
>
>> You believe the politicians? That's like believing Republicans are
>> actually going to create jobs instead of giving tax breaks to the
>> wealthy.
>
>Amazing! Didn't Obama promise -only- 8% unemployment if the stimulus
>was passed? Where are we at - 9.5%? And for how long now? 16 months?

And watch the "discouraged", "marginally attached", and "want a job
but not part of the workforce" numbers -- non-participation in the
workforce among those who want a job has gone up significantly.
("Want a job but not part of the workforce" means you haven't looked
for a job in the past year or that you want a job but are unavailable
to work, e.g. because you're in school or disabled)

>Didn't Obama give money to car companies that sent jobs overseas and
>closed plants and dealerships in this country?

He completely took control of one of them.
--
The problem with socialism is there's always
someone with less ability and more need.