if people walk to school it will also help to stop congestion and less polution.we should also encourage people to use their gardens to grow more trees and shrubs.
2007-03-30 02:50:10 · 12 answers · asked by patrick f 1 in Environment
Once upon a time, a bleeding heart liberal parent cried to the government that his/her poor little baby had to walk more than three feet to get to school. The government was tired of listening to all the crying about "poor little baby" and decided to use the standard answer to solve the problem: throw money at it. This started the busing of children who lived "too far away" from the school, and eventually almost every student wound up receiving a ride. The people who support the schools, i.e., the taxpayers, had to foot the bill with higher taxes.
Now. as a result, we have a situation where property taxes are grotesquely skewed against the middle class and a large number of school children are overweight. The government will now spend billions of dollars funding a study to learn that school children are overweight -- guess who pays for this one? The school districts will seek more budget money to introduce a new concept in education -- physical education! Who will pay for it? All the overweight children and their classmates!
2007-03-30 03:10:32 · answer #1 · answered by NJGuy 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because we live is a free country where the VOTERS and not the government and not YOU alone decide what is legal. And I, along with 99% of all parents want the school bus, especially since the school can be 5 or 10 or even 20 miles away! In my school district, the bus does not run for any school less than 2 miles away. It is a cost thing though, not a pollution thing.
2007-03-30 10:35:38 · answer #2 · answered by campbelp2002 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I rode my bicycle to school for six years and so did my two brothers. A five mile round trip - but I thought it was great.
It's healthy, it promotes greater freedom and independence, it's good for the environment - and I actually got home faster on a bike than I would do in a car.
I don't think the school run should be banned; that's far too authoritarian. But I do think that local government should do everything it can to actively encourage walking and cycling to school (and to work).
Everyone's a winner.
2007-03-30 15:10:50 · answer #3 · answered by Zerg Proletariat 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because the people who believe it is their birth-rite to lug two tonnes of metal around with them everywhere they go, won't vote for them again.
The catch 22 is the assumption that it is safer to drive them then letting the kids go on the streets where they could be hit by a car, or stolen by the peado on every corner.
In actual fact the kids in cars get exposed more to air pollution, are more likely to develop asthma and are likely to be fatter. Doh!
I agree with someone else on here, banning is OTT but heavy persuasion is good.
2007-03-30 17:51:30 · answer #4 · answered by Rickolish 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
it is a way to change public perception of the general public. Banning school runs is not in thesame league as stimulating people to walk or cycle to work. Where i live people get subsidized for riding their bike to work, trying to change mentality with gifts.
walking calms the mind and calms your ways. it's much nicer in my perspective to enjoy life with less stress than sitting in a car getting stressed out.
Plants and nature in general have a soothing effect on the mind.
I guess i'm saying there are personal reasons that benefit this action plus you help nature in the process.
a win win situation.
Time is something we travel through. it is not the end of the road that's important it's everything we experience en route
2007-03-30 10:20:59 · answer #5 · answered by elmer 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Uhm, because America is too damn fat and we need to keep at least 10 percent of citizens fit for the possibility of war....
Obviously not all kids can walk to school, so there goes your idiotic proposal.
Here is a better question: why do fat people cry about having to run only ONE mile....???
2007-03-30 09:58:06 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
If children could get into the schools of their choice it would help, but in my town kids have to travel up to 7 miles to get to school. I wouldn't want my kids to walk 14 miles a day
2007-03-30 09:56:41 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Massive public outcry and accusations of a nanny state?
Telling people what's good for them or legislating to that effect is notoriously unpopular.
2007-03-30 09:54:43 · answer #8 · answered by PJ 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Because this would take us even one step closer to an extreme 'nanny state' and takes away our freedom of choice. Why don't we just go ahead and ban anything that is bad for us, remotely dangerous etc........
2007-03-30 09:55:58 · answer #9 · answered by LBUK 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
could be a good idea, but not for people who are disabled like me and rely on a car just to maintain quality of life
2007-03-30 09:54:00 · answer #10 · answered by val f1 nutter 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋