On 12 Jul, 09:04, "Brimstone"
yahoo.co.uk> wrote:> Doug wrote:
>> On 10 Jul, 10:47, "Brimstone"
yahoo.co.uk> wrote:>>> Doug wrote:
>>>> On 8 Jul, 10:36, "Brimstone"
yahoo.co.uk> wrote:>>>>> Brimstone wrote:
>>>>>> Brimstone wrote:
>>>>>>> Brimstone wrote:
>>>>>>>> Doug wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 2 Jul, 10:45, Carlos
gmail.com> wrote:>>>>>>>>>> I stumbled across this interesting statistic based on the OECD
>>>>>>>>>> International Traffic Safety Data and Analysis Group.
>
>
>>>>>>>>>> It turns out that Britain has one of the least dense motorway
>>>>>>>>>> networks among rich OECD countries. Not only that, but we also
>>>>>>>>>> have some of the least amounts of motorway per capita (only a
>>>>>>>>>> meagre 60 mm, while each Canadian can call a 500 mm slice of
>>>>>>>>>> motorway their own). Even Slovenia and Portugal has more
>>>>>>>>>> motorway per capita. So much for the argument that motorway
>>>>>>>>>> building will ruin Britain
>>>>>>>>>> by "concreting over the country". France, Germany and Italy
>>>>>>>>>> all have a denser motorway network despite a lower population
>>>>>>>>>> density. Even "car unfriendly" nations such as Switzerland and
>>>>>>>>>> The Netherlands have far more motorways than we, and last time
>>>>>>>>>> I went there, I saw no sign of a ruined countryside.
>
>>>>>>>>>> Why is it that Britain isn't building any new motorways? Isn't
>>>>>>>>>> it about time?
>
>>>>>>>>> Actually it is not one of the least dense. Its twice as dense
>>>>>>>>> as USA, nine times as dense as Canada and Ireland and 24 times
>>>>>>>>> as dense as New Zealand and Norway. How do you think those
>>>>>>>>> countries manage with so few motorways?
>
>>>>>>>> Why does Luxembourg need such a high density of motorway per sq
>>>>>>>> km?
>
>>>>>>> Why no response Doug?
>
>>>>>> Still no comment Doug?
>
>>>>> No response Doug? What's up, cat got your tongue? You're normally
>>>>> very prompt when responding to an easily answered question.
>
>>>> My guess is that Luxembourg has allowed itself to become even more
>>>> dominated than UK by its motorist mob, who are in favour of
>>>> perpetual road building as an illusory cure for congestion.
>
>>> No Doug, not one of your guesses based on your pathetic prejudices.
>>> Let's have some facts.
>
>>> You started making the comparisons, let's look at both ends of the
>>> scale shall we?
>
>> OK, looking at the source given, Luxembourg has more motorways than GB
>> but fewer ordinary roads so the overall density and per capita is
>> similar. So much for the attempted justification for even more and
>> more roadbuilding in GB by the usual hypermobile suspects on this NG.
>
> Nice attempt at a dodge Doug. Other roads aren't under discussion, only
> motorways. Now answer the question, "Why does Luxembourg need such a high
> density of motorway per sq km?
Checkout the thread title. It says 'road building' not 'motorway
building'. Don't try to evade the issue by moving the goalposts.
