Laughing Jackasses on the Railways
"Ross" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 27 Jul 2005 16:28:57 GMT, Tom Haliax wrote in
, seen in uk.railway:
"Ross" wrote in message
...
work, I can catch a Southern train, or I can take about three
hours
travelling on multiple buses. Since I don't propose to spen a
quarter
of the day commuting, I have no option.
[big snip]
Car travel in particular would be more expensive than rail travel,
even if there were zero running costs. (A month's C-charge is more
expensive than 1/12 of a Gold Card from my station).
What you mean is that "I have another option, but I don't wish to take
it because it is more expensive", not "I have no option".
Rather different things.
[big snip]
Now now. Don't be silly.
Why not? Everyone else is being silly, in the "I don't agree therefore
any options presented are stupid and irrelevant" sense, so why
shouldn't I join in the fun?
Accept that for options to be viable they have to
be realistic rather than theoretical.
[big snip]
Yup. But, of course, realistic options rather rely on those they're
suggested to being open minded enough to actually realise that they're
realistic.
I think that's where the sticking point is, which makes the entire
conversation pointless, as it seems that any realistic option offered
gets an automatic response along the lines of "That's not realistic
because I don't like it".
Like you say, we're into schoolboy-ish arguments, and there ain't
nobody going to win because schoolboy arguments are never won; both
sides simply go off in a huff.
--
Ross, Lincoln, UK
No I,m not in a huff. I rather like a good arguement. End this as a score
draw?
|