Dear John,
.sp
I believe that unless your ideas about the automobile
are publicized, the Nation may decide to punish itself for
its sins by building a circa trillion dollar mass transit
system. It could be done in twenty-five years and be obsolete
before then.
.sp
The following arguments, mostly pointed out to me by you,
seem to add up to a powerful case for the car:
.sp
  we already have a trillion dollars worth of roads
  the population will grow but not double. If cars
     got a little smaller there may be enough parking space
     now; perhaps a little more is needed.
  a small well-designed vehicle could get by even with
     conventional engines at 1/10 current power, and
     thus be environmentally acceptable.
  a coordinated design could make the vehicle extremely safe;
     it could be insulated and have integrated air-bags, etc.
  if thoughtfully designed, it could be adaptable to standard
     "containerized" accessories and transprotation gadgets.
.sp
Probably, trucks should continue to exist.
.sp
It is plausible that, within twnety years, automatic controls
of various sorts can evolve. The social aspects of
.sp
   transporting children
   transporting elderly and handicapped
.sp
are more important than anyone thinks.
.sp
Long haul canbe expedited by airplane, with
transfer to new "national car" at other end and automatic
transfer of containerized baggage module to it, without
human hands.
.sp
Why don't you write a Scientific American Article -- like the
one on the "Hydrogen Economy" -- as a sort of national goal
proposal suggestion?

































































.                                                                       .