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.
Seattle and Portland are cities made up of mostly white people > mostly white people ride the bus > society loses the notion that riding the bus involves riding with poor people (which is misleading since white people can be poor, too) or that riding in a bus involves riding with people of a different ethnicity.
Let's not forget that white flight is the cause to why most of America's urban cores suffered so much. Since Portland and Seattle are so white in composition, white flight isn't a problem and public transit is not avoided.
It's not difficult to see that views towards race still dominate our perception of cities. Just ponder as to what cities come to mind when you think about "dangerous/bad/ghetto" cities and then ponder as to what sort of demographics you associate with those cities. In contrast, think about what cities or what neighborhoods are safe/livable/great and what demographics you associate with those cities. As sophisticated as we might think we are these days, most of us still operate with veiled racism, especially when we talk about cities and especially on this forum.
I have been curious about this as well. In certain regions of the States, it is more socially acceptable to get by without a car. Kind of weird, but that's how it is. Seattle and Portland are definitely top choices for car-free living outside of the usual suspects.
In certain regions of the States, it is more socially acceptable to get by without a car.
Again, I would switch this with practical .... it's more practical to get by without a car.
This leads to more people actually doing it, which leads to a diverse rider base where you'll have more of the professional person riding to work.
This is in part do to the structure and development of the city.
Some are just designed differently.
Honestly though, even places like Mpls had their limitations. When I lived there the light rail was being constructed so the bus ruled the roost. However, from the suburbs most bus lines were commuter lines which meant limited daily access and virtually no weekend access.
If I wanted to head to a game, concert, happy hour, etc I would pretty much have to take a cab back to my place.
This has been improved with the light rail, but still holds true for a good amount of the metro.
Same here in Phoenix. When I went to the baseball all star game we went out of our way and hit a light rail park and ride. Typically 20 minutes to downtown and parking is usually a breeze. However, with the event it was crowded, a lot of people not knowing where they were going and parking was super expensive. However, the light rail park and ride is further away than the actual stadium. There are parts of the metro on the line though and obviously it's a better option for them.
One of the venues would offer a free light rail ride if you had a ticket for their event .... so at that point if you lived on the line and were going it could make sense to just take the light rail, even if it would take an extra bit to get there versus driving ...... those people didn't become less snobby about public transportation, they just had an option open up to them that made sense
Well it's not just about being practical. People in areas like Texas or Phoenix will just look at you like you're crazy for wanting to go car-free. So it goes hand in hand. It has to do with the layout of the city as well as the people there.
Well the sunbelt is also generally way more conservative than those areas.
Conservatives --> value individual liberty more highly than almost anything else --> favor the freedom and flexibility of a private car
Lmfao, are we seriously bringing politics into this?
White people don't want to sit next to all those minorities in Houston, Atlanta and Phoenix.
Anyone will tell you its sketchy riding a bus in those cities.
Seattle, Portland and MSP have less mean scary minorities to deal with.
That's pretty much the reason.
Basically why Seattle and Portland are esteemed for its public-transit loving population. Bet you people wouldn't be so transit-happy if the demographics were less homogeneous.
Basically why Seattle and Portland are esteemed for its public-transit loving population. Bet you people wouldn't be so transit-happy if the demographics were less homogeneous.
They are not as transit happy as outsiders believe. Take a look at the Portland forum. On any given day you will see posts bemoaning the fact that traffic is continually increasing on what once was easy to get around on highways, longer commute times and growing traffic congestion.
There might also be posts talking about the scandals and many complaints about our public transportation system and how it serves those who run it financially much more than those who use it to get around.
I take the bus because I do not drive and have never owned a car. That goes back 35 years in Portland. To this day when I tell people I don't drive they look at me as if I am from another planet. They politely inquire if I have a physical disability. When I lived in the midwest, Chicago to be exact, no one batted an eye when I told them I didn't drive.
It has nothing to do with demographics. People in the West love their cars,motorcycles and trucks; anything motor driven. They may walk, bike or take public transportation but if they can afford to own a car, they have them.
I am less familiar with Seattle and Portland but I think the racial angle is overplayed in the case of Minneapolis. Minneapolis is 55% non Hispanic white, St Paul is around 60%. That is a majority but not an overwhelming one. There are a lot of non white riders on public transit here, possibly the majority of riders.
I am guessing that anyone who thinks middle class people ride the bus in Minneapolis because it is full of white people has never ridden the bus in Minneapolis.
Last edited by Drewcifer; 08-09-2013 at 09:04 PM..
Lmfao, are we seriously bringing politics into this?
Yes, the political climates of the cities involved are relevant to the discussion and therefore it is appropriate to include them. "Politics" the way you're using it means the same thing as "local culture" and "social climate," and I don't see how any of that is irrelevant. Nothing I said about conservatives is untrue or even defamatory. I'm sure most self-identified conservatives would happily agree with what I wrote.
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.
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.
