Social Engineers (wrongly) Accuse Kemper Freeman of Social Engineering
I always laugh when I read these articles that try to figure out why Kemper Freeman does what he does. They are always wrong, and this one in the Stranger is no different.
Throughout the piece, the author makes a basic assumption (several times) that Freeman is trying to impose HIS vision on society…a personal dream or agenda that Freeman himself has defined. This assumption is wrong and serves as the starting point on why social engineering schemes and the war on cars fails.
Why is the Stranger’s assumption wrong? Freeman is not imposing anything on society. In fact, it’s the other way around…society imposes its own will. It just so happens that Freeman is the only one who is listening.
More than 90% of all person trips are made in automobiles. People choose this mode on their own and spending multiple billions of dollars in public money on light rail will not replace or even put a dent in this behavior. Drivers like personal mobility because it creates freedom and accessibility and leads to economic wealth. Light rail on the other hand, has the opposite effect because it is extremely expensive and so few people choose to use it; light rail is a drain on society and increases the friction between what people want and how they get it. Sound Transit’s two votes would have turned out very differently if officials were more honest about its supposed benefits and higher costs.
Kemper Freeman’s ideas are not the sole product of his own agenda. Kemper Freeman’s ideas are a product of delivering what people want. Why do you think his properties are so successful? Why do you think the City of Bellevue has grown so dramatically in the last twenty years? Freeman has an acute understanding of markets and behavior. He responds to market demand and as a result, he is rightly rewarded for it. Need an example? There are more people who walk across Freeman’s sky bridge on Bellevue Way than will ride light rail across Lake Washington to Bellevue!
Freeman is successful because he understands market demand and he responds to it appropriately. Those who over promise the benefits of light rail, those who protest for more public hand outs, and those county leaders who bizarrely suggest we should stop shopping at Freeman’s mall are the ones who need their motives examined. Freeman’s fights over light rail, parking fees and every other device used by those who wage their war on cars campaign, has always been a battle for free markets, economic freedom and personal mobility. AND we are all better off for it.
Comments
"Drivers like personal
"Drivers like personal mobility because it creates freedom and accessibility and leads to economic wealth."
WRONG. People don't drive because it provides freedom and wealth. People drive because the government made it easy for them to drive than use any other mode of transportation. Stop burying the facts with your emotional rhetoric.
"People choose this mode on
"People choose this mode on their own and spending multiple billions of dollars in public money on light rail will not replace or even put a dent in this behavior."
I drive on the Eastside because there are currently limited options available. Improved bus service has allowed me to choose the bus for many trips, which I do. Improved bike paths would make me feel safer biking over here. With a stop .9 miles from my home and .5 miles from my work, light rail, when completed, will allow me to sell my second car - Frankly, I could use the exercise.
I want more choices and use them when they become available. From what I've seen there are many others over here like me. Seriously, I'm not trying to force you out of your car, I just want, and am willing to pay for, more options. Kemper is the social engineer, not Sound Transit.
social engineering?
government's facilitating of automobile travel
no laughing matter, this
I always laugh when I read articles from the WPC that attempt to defend the indefensible. But I guess six-figure salaries for WPC staff -- not to mention a million+ dollars a year in revenue -- means they don't even smirk when they write them.
(Source: https://www2.guidestar.org/organizations/91-1752769/washington-policy-ce...)
Do you think your article is
Do you think your article is influenced by the fact that Kemper Freeman is on your board of directors? Hmmmm.
Maybe people use cars instead of light rail because there isn't light rail. Try building it and see what people choose. Do you know how much tax money goes towards subsidizing roads, police to enforce the rules of the roads, auto manufacturers, etc etc?
This may be a little
This may be a little simplistic, but:
I do not currently own a car. I gave up my car over a decade ago, when I moved to Capitol Hill. Since I worked downtown, I did not need a car, and I got where I needed to go by bus or by foot.
Now, I work on the Eastside and live in Seattle. I still don't own a car. My employer generously provides a shuttle service for full-time employees that picks up and drops off very close to my home, so I've got that covered. But what if I want to pop over to Bellevue Square before I go home, and maybe spend a little of my hard-earned money? I can do that, but I'm looking at a bus commute home that will take around an hour.
I could buy a car... but once I put down a down payment, pay for insurance, pay for gas, and make my monthly car payment, how likely am I to have enough money left to bother with going to Bellevue Square to shop? Not bloodly likely, friends.
At least with light rail I could still spend my money enriching Mr. Freeman's tenants. Without light rail, I most likely won't ever shop at his mall.
This is trying to undo the will of the people.
People voted for light rail across I-90.
They VOTED for it. It's settled.
As if autos weren't subsidized
The premise of this editorial and Freeman's philosophy is that our car-based lifestyles grew organically from the magic market, out of nothing.
The logical failure here is that our car infrastructure has been subsidized from A to Z since the beginning of time by tax payers and citizens who have to pay the externalities.
The weak concept of the market being pushed here takes no measure of environmental harm (pollution & habitat loss), bad foreign policy (based on our oil dependence), public health costs (have you seen the trends in obesity?), and time (you can't build your way out of congestion).
Choice
"More than 90% of all person trips are made in automobiles. People choose this mode on their own"
Wrong! I drive into Seattle from Shoreline, but I would take light rail if I could. I know many other people who agree with me. The problem is that we don't have a CHOICE.
This shouldn't have to be said, but apparently it does: You can't call it a choice when there is only one option.
Why would I like to take light rail?
1) I don't want to get stuck in traffic, which is getting worse, and worse
2) It would be faster
3) It would be cheaper (if you include parking, gas)
4) It would be better for our environment: I don't want my kids growing up in smog and global warming
By the way, you guys don't really have the credibility to critique Sound Transit of dishonesty in past initiative when you are supporting, and Freeman is funding on his own, an anti-light rail initiative that doesn't mention the words "light rail".
Statistics please
"There are more people who walk across Freeman’s sky bridge on Bellevue Way than will ride light rail across Lake Washington to Bellevue!"
So how many people walk across the sky bridge everyday, and how many people are projected to ride the light rail? I don't necessarily disbelieve you, but, back it up with numbers, otherwise it looks like you're making stuff up.
Throughout this entire
Throughout this entire editorial, the author makes a basic assumption (several times) that the lightrailers are trying to impose THEIR vision on society…a personal dream or agenda that they himself has defined. This assumption is wrong and serves as the starting point on why lightrail is popular with voters who are not brainwashed by the DOT.
Lightrailers just want an option to sitting in rush hour traffic. They are perfectly fine with others who choose to drive. It's not about limiting choice, it's about giving us an option. The free market is based on options. And cars wouldn't even be popular if we didn't "socially engineer" the road infrastructure for them in the first place.
How many people drive into NYC versus taking the subway? In PDX, whole economies have popped up and transformed neighborhoods around their lightrail stations for the better, which is more tax revenue for the state. Even Othello and Rainier Beach are going through a renaissance because of our light rail already and it our lightrail barely goes anywhere yet.
Plus, lots of people don't have the privilege of owning a car.
I want options too, but....
users should be the ones who pay for it....Seattle's light rail will collect upwards of $50 billion from taxpayers, yet it will only carry about 1% of all regional trips!
So, how is forcibly removing
So, how is forcibly removing taxes from my pocket to go towards an unsustainable and uneconomical mode of transportation engaging in providing options and therefore a "free" market?
It's not...
...the government has a monopoly on our road system. Generally, the public sector controls, builds and funds our roadways. There are some recent exceptions where the private sector has used tolls to build roads for public use, but traditionally, roads have been a public function.
And driving automobiles is not unsustainable or uneconomical. Driving, in one way or another, has given you the quality of life you choose to have, and driving has a strong correlation to GDP... access and mobility are the cornerstones to economic activity.
Public transit, on the other hand....well that's a different story. In Washington State, transit agencies lose about $2 billion per year. This means taxpayers subsidize transit by $7.96 per passenger trip. And transit only carries 2.3% of all daily person trips statewide!
Public transit is the very definition of an unsustainable and uneconomical mode of transportation.
Anon, thank you
My thoughts exactly. Freeman is fine doing what he wants to do to Bellevue. Keep his kingdom over there please.
Kemper Freeman's agenda
Light Rail is the biggest fraud perpetrated on the taxpayers of this state since WPPSS. It is exorbitantly expensive, does not deliver on its supporter's promises, will never deliver the benefits its supporters claim, and will be obsolete within 20 years. Light rail serves one useful purpose. It moves people from point A to point B. Because it can only go from point A to point B, it doesn't do one thing about moving them from points C through Z. Nothing will ever replace the personal transportation module (automobile) for moving people from points A-Z. I'm sure the folks who built and operated streetcars thought they were the answer to mobility. But, just like light rail, they became obsolete because they only went from point A to point B. Kemper Freeman has built his success using good business acumen, lots of hard work, and more than a little bit of luck. His father was in the right place at the right time and he has capitalized on that bit of luck. Beyond that, everything else has been earned. One final point, if light rail were really all its supporters claim it to be, and if Freeman was really all about doing what's best for him and his businesses, wouldn't he be seeking to have the train stop in front of Bellevue Square instead of trying to stop it?
You ask: "...if light rail
You ask: "...if light rail were really all its supporters claim it to be, and if Freeman was really all about doing what's best for him and his businesses, wouldn't he be seeking to have the train stop in front of Bellevue Square instead of trying to stop it?"
Light rail would allow people on the east side to hop over to downtown Seattle and do their shopping there, avoiding the traffic and the parking fees. They could even park in Bellevue Square Mall. Seattle's nicer, more interesting, and has more options.
So, there you have it, ladies and gentlemen: more choice for shoppers. Shouldn't you gung-ho free marketeers like that?