44
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 27 Jul 2023
44 points (95.8% liked)
Aotearoa / New Zealand
1651 readers
10 users here now
Kia ora and welcome to !newzealand, a place to share and discuss anything about Aotearoa in general
- For politics , please use !politics@lemmy.nz
- Shitposts, circlejerks, memes, and non-NZ topics belong in !offtopic@lemmy.nz
- If you need help using Lemmy.nz, go to !support@lemmy.nz
- NZ regional and special interest communities
Rules:
FAQ ~ NZ Community List ~ Join Matrix chatroom
Banner image by Bernard Spragg
Got an idea for next month's banner?
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
That is not a reason to not diversify.
Uhh, what? The fact that the other option doesn't exist is no excuse?
I'm going to summarise this comment chain so far:
Article: 93% of freight is moved by road, we should try to diversify
You: All this article does it highlight problems, what's the point in that?
Other commenter: Highlighting problems is a point in and of itself, but they actually suggested many ways to improve the situation
You: Taking some freight on rail is "moronic" when we can build temporary road bridges when they get washed away
Other commenter: Rail is an option to add to the mix, the article is suggesting we do a mix of options
You: There's no point in putting any freight on rail, since there are some places rail doesn't go to
Other commenter: Just because rail doesn't go everywhere doesn't mean we can't diversify some freight onto rail
You: The railway lines don't exist so we can't put freight on them
You are using strawman arguments and seem to be deliberately ignoring or misinterpreting the responses you get. This is a place for good faith discussion, if you're not going to actually read the responses you're replying to it would be better if you didn't reply at all.
And you say I'm using strawman arguments? Grow up dave, and stop defending half arsed journalism.