Communication – what to change after the elections, part 2

Let there be 10,000,000 (say: ten million) cars in Poland and let everyone have a fire extinguisher for PLN 20, which must be replaced or approved every 2 years. We have a market of 200,000,000 (say: two hundred million) turnover for 2 years, or one hundred million turnover per year. And what is the use of it? Maybe 3 victims a year, maybe seven, maybe 15. We don’t know. Let the producer’s profit be 10%. So people have to spend a hundred million for someone to earn a fixed plot of 10 melons.

But someone will say that even if you save one hundred million for it, it pays off, because human life is priceless. Is it really?

On the Net, there are requests from parents collecting for operations, treatment of children with leukemia, diseases that are not refunded by the National Health Fund: one hundred thousand is needed, or fifty or one hundred and fifty. And she didn’t, and let the little shit die. It would be a greater benefit from those hundred million if they were going to pay for these children: a fire extinguisher tax of 10 zlotys a year instead of a fire extinguisher. Well, someone there would not get the plot.

There are about 15 million cars in Poland.

Now comes some automatic crash system obligatory (costly one time only). Installed in a new car, it is to ring when there is an accident, so that the ambulance arrives faster. In reality, ambulances will wait for confirmation anyway, so as not to go to a false alarm. But it will be possible to follow everyone non-stop. Anyway, here it will not be known if it works, because how to check? The only way is to smash the car against a concrete wall and it will ring or not.

This is how it works – under the guise of this and that, lobbying ensures se kasiorek for nothing under the guise. Let’s take these seat belts: they increase safety, improve, this, shh. In buses they introduced. But the question is, why is there no Pendolino? Suddenly it turns out to be pointless and bothersome. The state is unable to create added value, so it regulates with repression. Theoretically, this is how they can react that only horse-drawn carriages will pay off (practically even their own camera will not be able to withstand it).

II

I am not surprised by the reaction to the previous entry that it was sio. Let me remind you of the basic problem: street closures, e.g. in Warsaw, capacity limitation resulting from central control. They say that when there is a subway, cars won, i.e. the capacity of the city’s communication system does not increase. And what will I write about Warsaw:

In Krakow, contrary to these and those nonsense, the metro is not needed. The passenger train from Zastowo to the Main Railway Station takes 10 minutes, which means that from the Kombinat it could also go as long if they ran a piece of track along the fence. A 20 minutes and we are in Płaszów. Favorite bus 139 goes 37 minutes minimum to Kleparz and 501 28 minutes to the University of Technology. Meanwhile, now they are investing in a senseless line to Balice, where the ticket cost at times PLN 18, which is as much as the Krakow-Zakopane bus. But the commune collapsed the most, because:

1. They designed Nowa Huta from scratch and could take the appropriate railway line into account right away – either from above or below.
2. They had an irrational dislike of the idea of ​​the Rapid Urban Railway.
3. The railway monopoly was owned by PKP, which cared about it.
4. Who would pay for it? The city pays for MPK and it would also have to pay extra.
5. And get along.

So what for? As the nation was choking in overloaded buses, it is suffocating now. From Batowice, they would have to make an additional thread to raise the frequency of running. But you can’t because what for? Instead, they made a tunnel under the station which they filled in for 30 years.

III

Ecology also gives a hard time. The only ecological invention can be hybrids, because in a traffic jam on an electric motorbike it works. But we’ll see what happens in a few years with the disposal of used batteries. Fiction may be.

The PO introduces a ban on the entry of old cars into cities, which has nothing to do with ecology, because they should measure according to emissions. The matter goes deeper:

Imagine that the old car is already there and the new one is not there yet and needs to be produced. What are the production costs? This is not what the lobbyists (i.e. the so-called environmentalists) do not say, it is hard to check. But let the cost of producing a new car be as much as ten years of fuel consumption (estimated), because this can be as much. So we multiply the pollution of the new car x2 by 10 years. So it follows that it pays to drive old cars as long as possible, possibly replace catalysts, etc.

Environmentalists (i.e. lobbyists, i.e. car manufacturers), however, try to shorten the average life of a car, e.g. by introducing a new, expensive air-conditioning agent. In 5 years, if someone wants to replace it, they will pay half the value of the car. Will it pay off?

Summarizing what to do: Develop all kinds of communication, ie cars, trams, trains, buses. Dear to build. Roads are better than tram tracks because they have a greater capacity. Our bikes are not significantly improving the situation. Unless scooters.

Mental PRL did not introduce European standards, i.e. the possibility of buying a small car and driving it even without a driver. Another thing is that in the 90s the nation wanted to pledge and stand up and preferred shavings welded from 3 post-accident lumber and a stop. A small liter in those days and for the city would be OK. But no. And now there is no market for it either.