[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Technology and Coping
On Mon, 16 Jun 1997 09:33:02 -0400 (EDT),
Sorrento95@aol.com <Sorrento95@aol.com> wrote:
> We shouldn't have to buy expensive devices to
> keep recreational noise out of our homes.
I think the expense is another good reason to try and keep noise
cancellation systems from being hailed as the answer to the problem.
Unless some government subsidy program could make such technology
affordable for *everyone* only the affluent would benefit from it.
Any government actually faced with having to fund such a program would
probably take a hard look at using the funds to enforce existing noise
control laws instead.
And thinking of funds to enforce existing noise control laws, I was
listening to a radio program the other day on public funding for mass
transit. I believe the person being interviewed was a transportation
planner from Portland, OR. This person said that in the U.S. something
like 1.2 billion dollars was being spent (annually?) on subsidies for
mass transit, basically just trying to get people from the suburbs to
use mass transit instead of driving. One of the reasons cited for
people wanting to leave urban centers for the suburbs was the desire
for "quiet". Now it seems to me that if instead of having people
leave the city to find quiet, we could instead bring quiet to the
city, then we wouldn't need to spend so much on subsidies for mass
transit. Without the need to "get away" to find peace and quiet, I
think people would naturally prefer to live near where they work.
David Staudacher - email@example.com
QUIET-LIST: Internet Mail List and Forum for discussion of Noise Pollution,
Soundscape Awareness, and the Right to Quiet. Email: "firstname.lastname@example.org"
To subscribe, email "email@example.com" with message "subscribe quiet-list".
For info, send message "info quiet-list" to same.
Date Index |