Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Georgia > Atlanta
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-16-2015, 10:09 AM
 
10,974 posts, read 10,827,136 times
Reputation: 3435

Advertisements

sedimenjerry - It was not me that first made the comparison to total economies here, if you go back to my comment you can see it was a response bu2 attributing our status as the largest economy as being a result of out subsidies in highways over rail.

And you still have not offered any countries you think are fair to compare our transportation infrastructure too. So I am going to keep the assumption that there is no supporting evidence elsewhere in the world to justify our subsides of highways over passenger rail.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-16-2015, 08:37 PM
 
Location: Atlanta
5,618 posts, read 5,896,967 times
Reputation: 4875
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsvh View Post
sedimenjerry - It was not me that first made the comparison to total economies here, if you go back to my comment you can see it was a response bu2 attributing our status as the largest economy as being a result of out subsidies in highways over rail.

And you still have not offered any countries you think are fair to compare our transportation infrastructure too. So I am going to keep the assumption that there is no supporting evidence elsewhere in the world to justify our subsides of highways over passenger rail.
This is true. Still doesn't change the fact that your comparison was illogical.


Truth be told, I don't think there are any countries that are comparable. Size wise, Russia is humongous but has its population concentrated in the west. And it's about half the size. Canada is concentrated mainly in the southeast and then westward but never has a 2 major coast set up like the US. Also has nowhere near the population of the US and much of it is treacherous to travel in winter. Already been over China. Also, population is concentrated in the east. Looks like only one major rail line to Tibet and one with a few branches in the west. Brazil has a large chunk occupied by the Amazon leaving development closer to the coast. If you put LA and NYC within 300 miles of each other that's what Rio and Sao Paulo are like in Brazil. Australia is a lot smaller population wise and is concentrated in the east. The expanse of the plains pales in comparison the Outback separating east and west (mainly just Perth). India is a third of the size of the US, and has a billion more people.

For population, we don't compare at all to India or China. Next is Indonesia which is an archipelago. Already mentioned Brazil's set up. Pakistan? Really want to go there? Russia is half our population.

For density, our neighbors are the Faroe Islands, Zimbabwe, Venezuela and Latvia to name a few. Good luck making any conclusions by those countries.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-17-2015, 07:28 AM
 
10,974 posts, read 10,827,136 times
Reputation: 3435
sedimenjerry - Glad we finally got to the point you that you will admit you don't think anywhere's transportation infrastructure can be compared to us based on your requirements. Now I can say: your "requirements" are BS. I make my living doing comparisons / analytics. When you are tasked to look at something like "why are all the orange crops dieing but not other fruits" you will probably literally compare apples to oranges. The whole point of comparisons is to understand the differences.

When we want to understand "why doesn't the US have near the pax rail infrastructure as the rest of the world?" the exact things we should be doing is comparing ourselves to the rest of the world. That is how we understand what the drivers of the difference are. So we can compare ourselves to countries of similar and different GDP to determine that is not strongly correlated. Countries of similar and different densities to determine that is not a strong correlation either. And so on.

So to spoil it for you, the biggest difference is government highway policy. Countries around the world with similar federal transportation policies to us (such as Mexico) which subsidize gas and highways from the federal budget also have very weak national passenger rail networks. There are very few examples of nations that that require users to directly pay for highways and roads through tolls that do not also have robust pax rail. And the reverse, there are very few national passenger rail lines in countries with robust, subsidized, un-tolled, highway networks.

Now I will admit, once you get to the city / metro level comparisons there is a strong correlation between density and city-level rail transit. However I would argue transportation infrastructure is the cause and density is the effect. But that is a whole different discussion.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-17-2015, 07:33 AM
 
Location: O4W
3,744 posts, read 4,766,431 times
Reputation: 2076
Atlanta is way better than Seattle. We have more stuff to do, nicer people, better nightlife, better weather, it doesn't get dark as fast here in the evening, better looking women, we are closer to more important cities, more annual visitors, better looking women, the men act like men here and aren't wussies like they are in Seattle, more direct flights here, cheaper COL, etc, etc.

Seattle is still a nice city with great scenery, its green with a walkable downtown.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-17-2015, 08:10 AM
bu2
 
23,907 posts, read 14,701,286 times
Reputation: 12711
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsvh View Post
sedimenjerry - Glad we finally got to the point you that you will admit you don't think anywhere's transportation infrastructure can be compared to us based on your requirements. Now I can say: your "requirements" are BS. I make my living doing comparisons / analytics. When you are tasked to look at something like "why are all the orange crops dieing but not other fruits" you will probably literally compare apples to oranges. The whole point of comparisons is to understand the differences.

When we want to understand "why doesn't the US have near the pax rail infrastructure as the rest of the world?" the exact things we should be doing is comparing ourselves to the rest of the world. That is how we understand what the drivers of the difference are. So we can compare ourselves to countries of similar and different GDP to determine that is not strongly correlated. Countries of similar and different densities to determine that is not a strong correlation either. And so on.

So to spoil it for you, the biggest difference is government highway policy. Countries around the world with similar federal transportation policies to us (such as Mexico) which subsidize gas and highways from the federal budget also have very weak national passenger rail networks. There are very few examples of nations that that require users to directly pay for highways and roads through tolls that do not also have robust pax rail. And the reverse, there are very few national passenger rail lines in countries with robust, subsidized, un-tolled, highway networks.

Now I will admit, once you get to the city / metro level comparisons there is a strong correlation between density and city-level rail transit. However I would argue transportation infrastructure is the cause and density is the effect. But that is a whole different discussion.
Europe had a 20,000 year head start on settlement. And its nearly 40,000 years when you consider what European diseases did to the native American population. So, yes, it is unreasonable to compare the US to Europe. Its really unreasonable to compare the US to China or India. And it doesn't make sense to compare the US to the much poorer nations of Latin America. Maybe you can compare Canada, but there is a different culture there. Realistically, you need to compare US cities to other US cities.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-17-2015, 08:12 AM
bu2
 
23,907 posts, read 14,701,286 times
Reputation: 12711
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsvh View Post
sedimenjerry - It was not me that first made the comparison to total economies here, if you go back to my comment you can see it was a response bu2 attributing our status as the largest economy as being a result of out subsidies in highways over rail.

And you still have not offered any countries you think are fair to compare our transportation infrastructure too. So I am going to keep the assumption that there is no supporting evidence elsewhere in the world to justify our subsides of highways over passenger rail.
You do know what the inspiration for our interstate highway system was? Eisenhower saw the German autobahns.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-17-2015, 08:38 AM
 
Location: Atlanta
5,618 posts, read 5,896,967 times
Reputation: 4875
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsvh View Post
sedimenjerry - Glad we finally got to the point you that you will admit you don't think anywhere's transportation infrastructure can be compared to us based on your requirements. Now I can say: your "requirements" are BS. I make my living doing comparisons / analytics. When you are tasked to look at something like "why are all the orange crops dieing but not other fruits" you will probably literally compare apples to oranges. The whole point of comparisons is to understand the differences.

When we want to understand "why doesn't the US have near the pax rail infrastructure as the rest of the world?" the exact things we should be doing is comparing ourselves to the rest of the world. That is how we understand what the drivers of the difference are. So we can compare ourselves to countries of similar and different GDP to determine that is not strongly correlated. Countries of similar and different densities to determine that is not a strong correlation either. And so on.

So to spoil it for you, the biggest difference is government highway policy. Countries around the world with similar federal transportation policies to us (such as Mexico) which subsidize gas and highways from the federal budget also have very weak national passenger rail networks. There are very few examples of nations that that require users to directly pay for highways and roads through tolls that do not also have robust pax rail. And the reverse, there are very few national passenger rail lines in countries with robust, subsidized, un-tolled, highway networks.

Now I will admit, once you get to the city / metro level comparisons there is a strong correlation between density and city-level rail transit. However I would argue transportation infrastructure is the cause and density is the effect. But that is a whole different discussion.
Yes you will literally compare apples to oranges, but not crops in a subtropical borderline tropical environment of south Florida to crops in the northern plains. You'd look at crops in a similar climate using similar farming methods. You understand the differences but after you set controls. If you're gonna compare two weight loss plans, you don't pick two people at random, you pick people with similar weights, similar ages, heights, sex, etc. You want to know why all the trees are dying in a certain area, you look at trees nearby that aren't dying, not at trees half way across the US. Yea you're looking at differences to understand them, but only with controlled factors. I'm not even trying to make any conclusions on networks in other countries, just letting you know that comparing GDP between a country of 300 mil and one of 1.3 bil people is silly. Or that more drivers in a country of 1.3 bil than in a country of 300 mil implies something is silly.

I agree on trying to compare, but it would a lot more extensive than just mentioning two countries and having at it. Like comparing number of drivers between US and China without mentioning the 1 billion population difference. Or comparing GDP without looking at population, etc.

There are actually quite a few countries in Europe with free highways. The UK mainly has freeways with only a few tolls (like the US). Germany only recently added tolls to trucks and to foreign vehicles. If anything that makes me think we can have it both ways over here.

I'm willing to admit you were right all along if you agree these two statements are true:
1) Because a road in Hart County gets fewer cars per day than Peachtree Street downtown per hour during midday, rural lifestyles encourage less driving than urban lifestyles. Clearly being in an urban environment is causing people to drive more.

2) Because NYC has more registered cars than all of Fulton County, a city set up like NYC with high density encourages more people to drive.
Don't move the goalposts.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-17-2015, 08:45 AM
 
10,974 posts, read 10,827,136 times
Reputation: 3435
Quote:
Originally Posted by bu2 View Post
Realistically, you need to compare US cities to other US cities.
But that does you no good if you want to determine what effect federal (nation-wide) policy has had. You might just have to accept that the US is not so special that it can't be compared to elsewhere in the world.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bu2
You do know what the inspiration for our interstate highway system was? Eisenhower saw the German autobahns.
Yep. I am aware of that. But you think Eisenhower never should have been comparing us to Europe, right?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-17-2015, 09:26 AM
 
2,685 posts, read 6,030,838 times
Reputation: 952
Seattle is also taxing themselves extensively to build it, with the large majority of the funding being local through these taxes, Atlanta so far has tried to opposite, great plans but wait and pray for federal funding to complete

Quote:
Originally Posted by jsvh View Post
The city is actively moving forward with streetcar / LRT expansion. Expansions are also in the works for other areas. I bet we will see funding in place for major transit expansions in metro ATL before the end of 2016.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-17-2015, 09:40 AM
 
Location: Kirkwood
23,726 posts, read 24,753,815 times
Reputation: 5702
Quote:
Originally Posted by noah View Post
Seattle is also taxing themselves extensively to build it, with the large majority of the funding being local through these taxes, Atlanta so far has tried to opposite, great plans but wait and pray for federal funding to complete
Seattle is a tax friendly state, where the citizens do not mind paying taxes for infrastructure, etc. Georgia on the other hand is afraid of paying taxes and our lack of investment in infrastructure shows. But we will give away tax breaks like crazy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Georgia > Atlanta

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top