: Unless you get it wrong. If you do, and another person offers a better road journey then let the best idea win. The 'freedom' to complete a journey quickly is rather a loose use of the term though.I would agree, and say really it need to be a democratic process, although I'd also say that we know that road building cannot be left to the free market, socially we have to ensure we have a rational road network to ensure that we can all benefit from it- at the end of the programme, the suggestionw as, that actually trains offer a better service for personal transport ( between cities certainly...).
: I would like to have seen the mathimatical model but it sounds reasoned. Smooth flows counter the 'caterpillar' effect in traffic where changes 10 miles ahead lead to a mysterious traffic jam which, upon exiting it, appears to have no discernable cause.
Thats one of the things they talk about- the apparently pointless traffic jam...
: How much (%) did they reckon? or didnt they go into that kind of detail?
Can't remember...sorry...don't think they said, coz it was a fairly generalised account, not a description of a case study...
: Anyway, the principle suggested here can lead to dangerous unconnected conclusions - "hey look, if we control their driving we can improve their journeys, that means that if we control every aspect of their lives we can make everyone happier!" - its a trap that Marcos appears to fallen into.
I'd agree, I think what it does show is that co-operative planning for the social sphere is necessary, and that perhaps larger social structures should not be left to individual choices, as per public choice theory, but rather democratic control....
