|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Yaya
Joined: 25 Feb 2003
Location: Seoul
|
 Posted: Sun Dec 11, 2011 10:35 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Korea for the longest time had the world's highest rate of hit-and-run traffic accidents. Many children were left orphans and families were destroyed because of this, yet one idiot says we should understand that it's not the West?
I guess we should also understand and accept foot binding in China, wife suicides in India and the like, right? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 11, 2011 10:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The Floating World wrote: |
| Quote: |
| By the way, if you read what I wrote earlier, I explained the reason why Koreans are not really into following your "escalator etiquette." If you don't have time to scroll up, I'll spell it out for you: they don't have a escalator etiquette, because they simply haven't had escalators or even the walking etiquettes that you may be familiar with in your own country. It's not so easy to tell everyone "Hey, walk on the right side" or "Walk on the left side" when you've spent most of your history without the notion of sides. |
They've had escalators for decades. Wake up.
Cultural relatavists make me crack up. One of the main reaosns is Koreans themselves think foriegners trying to think and be like Koreans are 'weak.' They get it. |
| Quote: |
According to the Korea Elevator Safety Institute, 6843
escalators were installed by the end of 1999. They rose
sharply to 16,343 in 2006. |
http://www.childinjurylaws.com/An%20analysis%20of%20escalator-related%20injuries%20in%20an%20emergency%20department.pdf
Who are "They've"? Because SOME Koreans had escalators by or prior to 1999 it follows that ALL Koreans know escalator etiquette? Even in those places where it was installed years later? No not all places or Koreans have had escalators for decades. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 11, 2011 10:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| atwood wrote: |
[
You give yourself away with your example of the traffic lights. Look at how many car accidents and deaths there are in Korea compared to other nations. . |
http://www.internationaltransportforum.org/Irtadpublic/pdf/longterm.pdf
As we can see until 2009 both Japan and the U.S had more car fatalities than Korea did. In 2009 Korea slipped past Japan to take the second spot with 5838. But the U.S still holds first place with 33,808 which if we adjust for population is roughly the same.
So should we also say that the U.S system is not working very well too?
Japan's doesn't seem to be working out all that well either at 5772 fatalities in 2009. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atwood
Joined: 26 Dec 2009
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 12, 2011 12:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| atwood wrote: |
[
You give yourself away with your example of the traffic lights. Look at how many car accidents and deaths there are in Korea compared to other nations. . |
http://www.internationaltransportforum.org/Irtadpublic/pdf/longterm.pdf
As we can see until 2009 both Japan and the U.S had more car fatalities than Korea did. In 2009 Korea slipped past Japan to take the second spot with 5838. But the U.S still holds first place with 33,808 which if we adjust for population is roughly the same.
So should we also say that the U.S system is not working very well too?
Japan's doesn't seem to be working out all that well either at 5772 fatalities in 2009. |
Shouldn't that be adjusted for miles drivena nd number of vehicles on the road, among other things.
I think this is more comprehensive and supports my statement: http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/esv/esv19/05-0131-w.pdf
Here's another one from the website you referenced:
http://www.internationaltransportforum.org/irtadpublic/pdf/seoul/4-Choe.pdf |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rchristo10
Joined: 14 Jul 2009
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 12, 2011 3:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
| atwood wrote: |
You give yourself away with your example of the traffic lights. Look at how many car accidents and deaths there are in Korea compared to other nations. It's not working very well. What's going on "behind the scenes" there? |
The number of car accidents and deaths in Korea have to do with traffic lights? All this time I thought it was drunken driving and road rage. But, I believe you were already schooled on this one so I'll let it be...silly person. (I don't even want to ask what nation you're comparing Korea with... )
| atwood wrote: |
Is it really that difficult to see and understand that walking on one side of the street makes it easier for everyone? |
Actually quite! When "systems" (to use your word) become cluttered, single file is likely the worst possible answer to moving faster or orderly. If you sat down and really thought about it, you'd realize that if people actually didn't cluster and walk in similar patterns as bees and ants then it would be substantially harder to get to and fro--not vice-versa. Let's see you take that strategy in Myeongdong, Seoul. That would be pretty interesting to say the least. Or, perhaps you sort of walk behind everyone you happen to be following to maintain order? Silly...silly indeed.
Now if you want to stick to the subject--elevator lines--you'd realize that the effect of everyone being courteous and using the right for only standing and the left for only walking doesn't really do much in terms of convenience. Why? It causes backup. The people not wanting to walk up simply cluster in an area that makes it difficult to even get onto the walking side. So regardless, your time and convenience is not necessarily assured even if your sense of etiquette is followed to the letter. Of course, I'm sure that that would lead to your bitching and whining about the size of the platforms in many subways and how they're not big enough for the number of people getting on and off. But bitching and whining is a vicious cycle.
Next you'll be wondering why no one says excuse me to get by...of course not realizing that there's no technical word for the expression although 참시만요 is starting to take off. But still, it would be pretty silly to walk over a human, wouldn't it?
| atwood wrote: |
Many think that human altruism is an evolutionary trait derived from the higher chances of survival that cooperation brings. It makes people safer on the streets just as it makes it easier to arrive at your destination.
|
"VOTE YES FOR COMPULSORY ALTRUISM!  IT MAKES PEOPLE SAFER ON THE STREETS JUST AS I MAKES IT EASIER TO ARRIVE AT YOUR DESTINATION!" This campaign was brought to you by the Silly Brotherhood.
Come on. Ever dabbled in a bit of Marx or perhaps Ayn Rand? I'd argue that "many" may agree about the wonderful world of human altruism...but well...a great deal more AROUND THE WORLD simply don't. But I commend you for the interesting attempt at using pathos and evolution together for argumentative. I probably would have crapped out something as convoluted as a "collective intuition" as a means of social protection, before I'd bend to the idea that altruism is evolutionary...you'd sound like a person who couldn't tell the different between Lamarck and Darwin....hmmm...
But, in the real world, not every prosaic banality deserves the attention it gets. Certainly throwing out altruism as support for why people should conform to your ways and desires is about as silly as...keke...you guessed it...(just in case: YOU).
| atwood wrote: |
There's no bright, flashing arrow requiring you to think before you post. |
Ewww....cool...I think Freud called this...projection! 
Question: What escalator is so long that you believe you're life schedule has been thrown off? The longest I've ever seen was Ewha Womans [sic] University, hands down. (Although I'd like to compare the length of the new #9 escalator near Gangnam and Express Bus Terminal. I think the former cheats though since it's technically two escalators)
Last edited by rchristo10 on Mon Dec 12, 2011 4:43 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bueblo
Joined: 04 Nov 2011
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 12, 2011 4:41 am Post subject: Re: Lack of escalator etiquette in Korea |
|
|
| pkang0202 wrote: |
| Yaya wrote: |
Ever notice how Koreans will just stand on the left side of the escalator when it should be the passing lane? I hear the Seoul city government tried to get people to stand on the right and pass on the left but it seems to have backtracked.
I've seen this behavior in Manila and other Asian cities as well but I've also had incidents where Koreans wouldn't move and I argued with them. |
If it bothers you so much, use the stairs. |
Sometimes, you can't. Leaving the train station in Daegu for example, has nothing other than a narrow escalator with no stairs for those who want to hurry on up. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atwood
Joined: 26 Dec 2009
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 12, 2011 3:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| rchristo10 wrote: |
| atwood wrote: |
You give yourself away with your example of the traffic lights. Look at how many car accidents and deaths there are in Korea compared to other nations. It's not working very well. What's going on "behind the scenes" there? |
The number of car accidents and deaths in Korea have to do with traffic lights? All this time I thought it was drunken driving and road rage. But, I believe you were already schooled on this one so I'll let it be...silly person. (I don't even want to ask what nation you're comparing Korea with... )
| atwood wrote: |
Is it really that difficult to see and understand that walking on one side of the street makes it easier for everyone? |
Actually quite! When "systems" (to use your word) become cluttered, single file is likely the worst possible answer to moving faster or orderly. If you sat down and really thought about it, you'd realize that if people actually didn't cluster and walk in similar patterns as bees and ants then it would be substantially harder to get to and fro--not vice-versa. Let's see you take that strategy in Myeongdong, Seoul. That would be pretty interesting to say the least. Or, perhaps you sort of walk behind everyone you happen to be following to maintain order? Silly...silly indeed.
Now if you want to stick to the subject--elevator lines--you'd realize that the effect of everyone being courteous and using the right for only standing and the left for only walking doesn't really do much in terms of convenience. Why? It causes backup. The people not wanting to walk up simply cluster in an area that makes it difficult to even get onto the walking side. So regardless, your time and convenience is not necessarily assured even if your sense of etiquette is followed to the letter. Of course, I'm sure that that would lead to your bitching and whining about the size of the platforms in many subways and how they're not big enough for the number of people getting on and off. But bitching and whining is a vicious cycle.
Next you'll be wondering why no one says excuse me to get by...of course not realizing that there's no technical word for the expression although 참시만요 is starting to take off. But still, it would be pretty silly to walk over a human, wouldn't it?
| atwood wrote: |
Many think that human altruism is an evolutionary trait derived from the higher chances of survival that cooperation brings. It makes people safer on the streets just as it makes it easier to arrive at your destination.
|
"VOTE YES FOR COMPULSORY ALTRUISM! IT MAKES PEOPLE SAFER ON THE STREETS JUST AS I MAKES IT EASIER TO ARRIVE AT YOUR DESTINATION!" This campaign was brought to you by the Silly Brotherhood.
Come on. Ever dabbled in a bit of Marx or perhaps Ayn Rand? I'd argue that "many" may agree about the wonderful world of human altruism...but well...a great deal more AROUND THE WORLD simply don't. But I commend you for the interesting attempt at using pathos and evolution together for argumentative. I probably would have crapped out something as convoluted as a "collective intuition" as a means of social protection, before I'd bend to the idea that altruism is evolutionary...you'd sound like a person who couldn't tell the different between Lamarck and Darwin....hmmm...
But, in the real world, not every prosaic banality deserves the attention it gets. Certainly throwing out altruism as support for why people should conform to your ways and desires is about as silly as...keke...you guessed it...(just in case: YOU).
| atwood wrote: |
There's no bright, flashing arrow requiring you to think before you post. |
Ewww....cool...I think Freud called this...projection!
Question: What escalator is so long that you believe you're life schedule has been thrown off? The longest I've ever seen was Ewha Womans [sic] University, hands down. (Although I'd like to compare the length of the new #9 escalator near Gangnam and Express Bus Terminal. I think the former cheats though since it's technically two escalators) |
You're quite good at twisting what I've posted to create strawmen that even you can knock down! Bravo!
And I admire the lengths that you will go to do so. You must have gone to schools where the teachers used the old fashioned way of grading essays--they'd stand at the top of the stairs and let the essays sail down. Just as long as you wrote enough, no matter how little sense it made, you'd get As.
But I digress. I posted nothing about walking in single file or one's life schedule being thrown off. As for traffic lights, think about it a little more and you may figure out how running reds causes accidents and pedestrian deaths. And if the traffic regulations were obeyed more routinely, there wouldn't be so many silent policemen on the roads, especially in apartment complexes and near schools.
Marx, Ayn Rand, Freud, Lamarck and Darwin--from red herrings to hiding behind some names you once saw in a textbook or on a novel spine. Read Pinker's latest if you want to know about evolution and altruism.
Continue on with your nonsense and personal attacks. Maybe if you write enough, you'll eventually find a logical argument. At this point I'd give you two chances at it--slim and none. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Zyzyfer
Joined: 29 Jan 2003
Location: who, what, where, when, why, how?
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 12, 2011 5:09 pm Post subject: Re: Lack of escalator etiquette in Korea |
|
|
| bueblo wrote: |
| pkang0202 wrote: |
| If it bothers you so much, use the stairs. |
Sometimes, you can't. Leaving the train station in Daegu for example, has nothing other than a narrow escalator with no stairs for those who want to hurry on up. |
It's a hard knock life, yo. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 12, 2011 5:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| atwood wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| atwood wrote: |
[
You give yourself away with your example of the traffic lights. Look at how many car accidents and deaths there are in Korea compared to other nations. . |
http://www.internationaltransportforum.org/Irtadpublic/pdf/longterm.pdf
As we can see until 2009 both Japan and the U.S had more car fatalities than Korea did. In 2009 Korea slipped past Japan to take the second spot with 5838. But the U.S still holds first place with 33,808 which if we adjust for population is roughly the same.
So should we also say that the U.S system is not working very well too?
Japan's doesn't seem to be working out all that well either at 5772 fatalities in 2009. |
Shouldn't that be adjusted for miles drivena nd number of vehicles on the road, among other things.
I think this is more comprehensive and supports my statement: http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/esv/esv19/05-0131-w.pdf
Here's another one from the website you referenced:
http://www.internationaltransportforum.org/irtadpublic/pdf/seoul/4-Choe.pdf |
As regards the first link I get this:
As for the second...might want to check the dates of the references AND validity of the claims...here's a sample quote.
| Quote: |
While looking into the report from
International Road and Traffic Accident Database (IRTAD, 2004), Sweden proves to be the safest of all. It is
regrettable to note that both Korea and USA be the worst nations in traffic safety matters. |
I would suggest (a) that stats from 2004 are not reflective of stats in 2011 and (b) as we can see from my link it was Japan and not Korea that had the second highest number of fatalities every year it was measured until 2009. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 12, 2011 5:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Yaya wrote: |
| Korea for the longest time had the world's highest rate of hit-and-run traffic accidents. ? |
I don't suppose you'd care to give us the links for this? I ask because when I Google...only this comes up for Korea
I did however see this.
| Quote: |
Cars Kill
Deaths from Cars. Car emissions kill 30,000 people and car collisions kill 46,000 each year in the U.S. (2) Of these, 25,136 were a result of road departure, 9213 intersection-related, and 4749 were pedestrians. (FHWA)
Motorists usually at fault. The NYC group Right of Way says: "After NYC cycling fatalities increased twofold in 1999, police rushed to cover their, er, reputation by claiming (without analysis or supporting data) that cyclists are to blame in 75% of cycling deaths. Right of Way took a closer look. Surprise! The truth is just the reverse, as listed in our report, The Only Good Cyclist (PDF)." According to Right of Way, over 90% of pedestrian deaths in NYC are the fault of drivers. And research from Toronto shows the same thing for car-bike crashes.
Most at-fault motorists who kill cyclists and pedestrians get off the hook. A study by the Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition shows that three out of four at fault drivers were never even cited for hitting and killing pedestrians. 22% of fatal pedestrian crashes involved hit and run drivers, yet, none of the runaway motorists were found or charged. In New York, 70-92% of drivers were at-fault in killing pedestrians and cyclists, but 74% didn't even get a ticket. (RightOfWay.org, 1999) The story in Austin is similar. |
http://bicycleuniverse.info/transpo/almanac-safety.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Yaya
Joined: 25 Feb 2003
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 12, 2011 7:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I couldn't find the stats but I remember reading back in the 1990s in the English-language dailies about Korean children who were orphaned because of hit-and-run drivers killing their parents, and the articles said Korea had the highest rate. Not sure how they got that but I could certainly believe it given the horrendous lack of traffic manners back in the 1990s (and today). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atwood
Joined: 26 Dec 2009
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 12, 2011 8:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| atwood wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| atwood wrote: |
[
You give yourself away with your example of the traffic lights. Look at how many car accidents and deaths there are in Korea compared to other nations. . |
http://www.internationaltransportforum.org/Irtadpublic/pdf/longterm.pdf
As we can see until 2009 both Japan and the U.S had more car fatalities than Korea did. In 2009 Korea slipped past Japan to take the second spot with 5838. But the U.S still holds first place with 33,808 which if we adjust for population is roughly the same.
So should we also say that the U.S system is not working very well too?
Japan's doesn't seem to be working out all that well either at 5772 fatalities in 2009. |
Shouldn't that be adjusted for miles drivena nd number of vehicles on the road, among other things.
I think this is more comprehensive and supports my statement: http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/esv/esv19/05-0131-w.pdf
Here's another one from the website you referenced:
http://www.internationaltransportforum.org/irtadpublic/pdf/seoul/4-Choe.pdf |
As regards the first link I get this:
As for the second...might want to check the dates of the references AND validity of the claims...here's a sample quote.
| Quote: |
While looking into the report from
International Road and Traffic Accident Database (IRTAD, 2004), Sweden proves to be the safest of all. It is
regrettable to note that both Korea and USA be the worst nations in traffic safety matters. |
I would suggest (a) that stats from 2004 are not reflective of stats in 2011 and (b) as we can see from my link it was Japan and not Korea that had the second highest number of fatalities every year it was measured until 2009. |
The first link works for me. I just tried it.
So Korea's not the worst, but that doesn't prove there's not a problem.
As for the U.S., to make a fair comparison, number of miles driven, vehicles per capita, etc. need to be taken into account.
The U.S. traffic system was built on a different philosophy than those in countries like the Netherlands (Sweden I don't know about.). It puts the major emphasis on getting drivers to their destinations in as little time as possible while in the Netherlands safety is the driving factor in road design; thus, lots and lots of rotaries for example. These are obviously extensions of the countries' overall philosophies as well.
Yes, the 2011 chart is newer but it's unclear if that includes pedestrian fatalities. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atwood
Joined: 26 Dec 2009
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 12, 2011 8:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| Yaya wrote: |
| Korea for the longest time had the world's highest rate of hit-and-run traffic accidents. ? |
I don't suppose you'd care to give us the links for this? I ask because when I Google...only this comes up for Korea
I did however see this.
| Quote: |
Cars Kill
Deaths from Cars. Car emissions kill 30,000 people and car collisions kill 46,000 each year in the U.S. (2) Of these, 25,136 were a result of road departure, 9213 intersection-related, and 4749 were pedestrians. (FHWA)
Motorists usually at fault. The NYC group Right of Way says: "After NYC cycling fatalities increased twofold in 1999, police rushed to cover their, er, reputation by claiming (without analysis or supporting data) that cyclists are to blame in 75% of cycling deaths. Right of Way took a closer look. Surprise! The truth is just the reverse, as listed in our report, The Only Good Cyclist (PDF)." According to Right of Way, over 90% of pedestrian deaths in NYC are the fault of drivers. And research from Toronto shows the same thing for car-bike crashes.
Most at-fault motorists who kill cyclists and pedestrians get off the hook. A study by the Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition shows that three out of four at fault drivers were never even cited for hitting and killing pedestrians. 22% of fatal pedestrian crashes involved hit and run drivers, yet, none of the runaway motorists were found or charged. In New York, 70-92% of drivers were at-fault in killing pedestrians and cyclists, but 74% didn't even get a ticket. (RightOfWay.org, 1999) The story in Austin is similar. |
http://bicycleuniverse.info/transpo/almanac-safety.html |
Without anything to compare to, the 4749 pedestrian deaths are meaningless in the context of this discussion. Obviously, they are not meaningless to those involved.
If the motorists weren't cited, how do they know they were at fault? The link to that study is dead so I couldn't find out how they determined fault.
Of course, a cycling site is far from a balanced source. That said, I did find this interesting statistic there: 33,041 motorists/passengers died (p. 86) from 3 trillion miles traveled (p. 15), making their death rate 0.11 per 10 million miles traveled.
That's for the U.S. Can you find anything comparable for Korea? Also, that it was for motorists/passengers and doesn't include pedestrians would seem to suggest your chart doesn't include pedestrian deaths either. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rchristo10
Joined: 14 Jul 2009
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 12, 2011 8:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| atwood wrote: |
| rchristo10 wrote: |
| atwood wrote: |
You give yourself away with your example of the traffic lights. Look at how many car accidents and deaths there are in Korea compared to other nations. It's not working very well. What's going on "behind the scenes" there? |
The number of car accidents and deaths in Korea have to do with traffic lights? All this time I thought it was drunken driving and road rage. But, I believe you were already schooled on this one so I'll let it be...silly person. (I don't even want to ask what nation you're comparing Korea with... )
| atwood wrote: |
Is it really that difficult to see and understand that walking on one side of the street makes it easier for everyone? |
Actually quite! When "systems" (to use your word) become cluttered, single file is likely the worst possible answer to moving faster or orderly. If you sat down and really thought about it, you'd realize that if people actually didn't cluster and walk in similar patterns as bees and ants then it would be substantially harder to get to and fro--not vice-versa. Let's see you take that strategy in Myeongdong, Seoul. That would be pretty interesting to say the least. Or, perhaps you sort of walk behind everyone you happen to be following to maintain order? Silly...silly indeed.
Now if you want to stick to the subject--elevator lines--you'd realize that the effect of everyone being courteous and using the right for only standing and the left for only walking doesn't really do much in terms of convenience. Why? It causes backup. The people not wanting to walk up simply cluster in an area that makes it difficult to even get onto the walking side. So regardless, your time and convenience is not necessarily assured even if your sense of etiquette is followed to the letter. Of course, I'm sure that that would lead to your bitching and whining about the size of the platforms in many subways and how they're not big enough for the number of people getting on and off. But bitching and whining is a vicious cycle.
Next you'll be wondering why no one says excuse me to get by...of course not realizing that there's no technical word for the expression although 참시만요 is starting to take off. But still, it would be pretty silly to walk over a human, wouldn't it?
| atwood wrote: |
Many think that human altruism is an evolutionary trait derived from the higher chances of survival that cooperation brings. It makes people safer on the streets just as it makes it easier to arrive at your destination.
|
"VOTE YES FOR COMPULSORY ALTRUISM! IT MAKES PEOPLE SAFER ON THE STREETS JUST AS I MAKES IT EASIER TO ARRIVE AT YOUR DESTINATION!" This campaign was brought to you by the Silly Brotherhood.
Come on. Ever dabbled in a bit of Marx or perhaps Ayn Rand? I'd argue that "many" may agree about the wonderful world of human altruism...but well...a great deal more AROUND THE WORLD simply don't. But I commend you for the interesting attempt at using pathos and evolution together for argumentative. I probably would have crapped out something as convoluted as a "collective intuition" as a means of social protection, before I'd bend to the idea that altruism is evolutionary...you'd sound like a person who couldn't tell the different between Lamarck and Darwin....hmmm...
But, in the real world, not every prosaic banality deserves the attention it gets. Certainly throwing out altruism as support for why people should conform to your ways and desires is about as silly as...keke...you guessed it...(just in case: YOU).
| atwood wrote: |
There's no bright, flashing arrow requiring you to think before you post. |
Ewww....cool...I think Freud called this...projection!
Question: What escalator is so long that you believe you're life schedule has been thrown off? The longest I've ever seen was Ewha Womans [sic] University, hands down. (Although I'd like to compare the length of the new #9 escalator near Gangnam and Express Bus Terminal. I think the former cheats though since it's technically two escalators) |
You're quite good at twisting what I've posted to create strawmen that even you can knock down! Bravo!
And I admire the lengths that you will go to do so. You must have gone to schools where the teachers used the old fashioned way of grading essays--they'd stand at the top of the stairs and let the essays sail down. Just as long as you wrote enough, no matter how little sense it made, you'd get As.
But I digress. I posted nothing about walking in single file or one's life schedule being thrown off. As for traffic lights, think about it a little more and you may figure out how running reds causes accidents and pedestrian deaths. And if the traffic regulations were obeyed more routinely, there wouldn't be so many silent policemen on the roads, especially in apartment complexes and near schools.
Marx, Ayn Rand, Freud, Lamarck and Darwin--from red herrings to hiding behind some names you once saw in a textbook or on a novel spine. Read Pinker's latest if you want to know about evolution and altruism.
Continue on with your nonsense and personal attacks. Maybe if you write enough, you'll eventually find a logical argument. At this point I'd give you two chances ait--slim and none. |
Not much of a come back smarty pants. Gosh, I was actually thinking you'd show some of that creative thinking...being that you're so not a "lazy thinker." And all you do is come back with pejoratives and attempts at being...well...you (just in case it's still unclear: Silly)
By the way, there may have been personal attacks (unintentional aside from pointing out your silliness), but I'd love to see you point out the nonsense in anything i've written thus far.
Keep arguing you point. I'm curious to know more about why you think Korean people should obey your escalator etiquette.
Don't wimp out on me, gosh. 
1. The total number of deaths and accidents and the correlation of running red lights is extremely low. Also, accidents directly involving running red lights makes up a small percentage of the total accidental injuries and deaths on the streets (I've asked for information at 통계청 and will get to you on the figures).
2. If you're arguing that people walk on either side going in a particular direction, then at some point you're saying they should walk single file. Particularly if you consider the crowds in subways. But like I said, the cluttering caused by your method is pretty much unavoidable; people waiting to get on the standing (right) side will eventually make getting on the left difficult.
3. I went to a rather old school with the ivy and all, so I wouldn't doubt that my profs used rather antediluvian methods.
4. I pick 5 authors, you pick one. I guess if you see Pinker on the same level as the one's I choose...that's...hmm...nevermind....I think you know by now.
Last edited by rchristo10 on Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:02 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| atwood wrote: |
[
The first link works for me. I just tried it.
So Korea's not the worst, but that doesn't prove there's not a problem.
. |
Still not working for me...might be the Firefox browser I'm using.
Oh there's definitely a problem. No disagreement there.
I was just commenting on this statement by you
| Quote: |
| Look at how many car incidents and deaths there are in Korea compared to other nations. It's not working very well. What's going on "behind the scenes" there? |
Seems to me that overall it does slightly better then a couple of other nations both of which are richer nations and who were considered "developed" long before Korea. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
