David Hansen wrote:
On Fri, 5 Dec 2008 09:29:15 -0000 someone who may be "Depresion"
127.0.0.1 wrote this:-

Bus companies don't have the right to build laybys wherever they need a
stop and on many routes there wouldn't be any place to put them , or
alternative locations to use
Then they don't get to stop and traffic can flow again. Good solution.

(Motor) traffic is stopped by many things. The greatest cause of
delays to traffic is motorists in cars. There are so many of them
that they clog roads in towns. After that delays are caused by
things like road junctions, though these are really a manifestation
of too many motorists.

There are two ways to solve congestion. The first way to do this
only works for a while, knock everything down and expand into the
countryside. Where this has been tried it has only worked for a
while before congestion rose again. Los Angeles is a good example.

The second way works in the long term. Transfer some of the trips to
walking, cycling and public transport. One of the ways to do this is
to make buses more attractive. One of the ways of making buses more
attractive is by filling in laybys and installing better stops and
bus boarders in the space the layby used to take up. Not only does
it work but it is better for everyone, despite the whining of a
small but vocal minority.



Funny old world isn't it. The refusal to expand the road networks
results in severe traffic congestion for all forms of vehicular
transport, but it's only ever the fault of the private motorist.

Presumably, with the ever increasing overcrowding on the rail network,
you're in favour of closing a few branch lines to assist people in
deciding to find alternative forms of transport, in addition to pricing
this form of transport beyond the means of many people?

--
Moving things in still pictures!