[Tr1] In a piece about supersonic air travel, I think James Pehokoukis buries the lede: Environmentalists will likely lose nearly every argument where they are up against immediate and near-term consumer benefit and economic growth… and I don’t see how they win the debate while losing those battles.
[Tr2] I’m always suspicious of arguments that involve aesthetic and value preferences actually saving money, but a guy can hope, right?
[Tr3] Caution: There’s a new danger on the roads in Saudi Arabia.
[Tr4] This is kind of weird. Most of the time when I fly they are pretty good about taking the trash pretty repeatedly.
[Tr5] Georgia passed a new hands-free law with regard to cell phones while driving. I’d thought that they were ineffective, but maybe not.
[Tr6] Pedestrians are getting killed by cars at an alarming rate, and while we initially blame texting and distracted driving the problem appears to be the proliferation of SUVs. Wisely, the article doesn’t bother to suggest we change the kinds of cars we drive, but they do propose a mixed bag of regulations that might help.
[Tr7] According to Politico, Trump is working to derail an important tunnel project.
[Tr8] Good.
[Tr9] Better watch where you’re driving or the planet may eat you up.
Will Truman is the Editor-in-Chief of Ordinary Times. He is also on Twitter. ...more →
Is planebae a transportation story?
This seems like a no win story for the critiquers because they also need to rely on the content that they wish to quash or at least are doing the same thing of mining tweets for content?
Though what I really don’t understand is how this becomes a segment for the Today show. Does the drive for content and scoop just make it impossible for people to pause for consideration and whether something is good? Or do the people who get jobs producing content for the Today shoe just not have any scruples to consideration?
Saul DegrawQuote Link
Report