Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
 [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)
View Poll Results: Did you know LA had a subway?
Yes 59 63.44%
No 25 26.88%
Yes (but i ignored it) 9 9.68%
Voters: 93. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-22-2008, 05:01 PM
 
Location: moving again
4,383 posts, read 16,766,060 times
Reputation: 1681

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by sav858 View Post
Why would you even bother comparing them? It's a very unfair comparison given the different sizes of each system.
Because i feel LA should have a better and bigger system than DC. Its not that unfair when you factor in the size of the cities
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-22-2008, 05:07 PM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
18,982 posts, read 32,656,174 times
Reputation: 13635
Quote:
Originally Posted by Billiam View Post
Because i feel LA should have a better and bigger system than DC. Its not that unfair when you factor in the size of the cities
A lot of cities should have a bigger system than they do and pretty much everyone in LA feels that way too. DC is completely different type of city than LA, it's older and more centralized and has a different history of development. When you are comparing one 20 mile long rail line to the nations 2nd largest heavy rail system, yes it is an unfair comparison. The size of the city doesn't really matter when the density, land uses, development patterns, and transportation networks are very different.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-22-2008, 05:31 PM
 
Location: moving again
4,383 posts, read 16,766,060 times
Reputation: 1681
Quote:
Originally Posted by sav858 View Post
A lot of cities should have a bigger system than they do and pretty much everyone in LA feels that way too. DC is completely different type of city than LA, it's older and more centralized and has a different history of development. When you are comparing one 20 mile long rail line to the nations 2nd largest heavy rail system, yes it is an unfair comparison. The size of the city doesn't really matter when the density, land uses, development patterns, and transportation networks are very different.
That's very true. But to me, i feel the bigger the city, the more riders it should have, the larger it should be but thats just not the case with LA. I don't think its unfair to compare the two though. A metro with 17-18 million should have a larger and more riden subway than a metro of 8-10 million
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-22-2008, 06:40 PM
 
Location: 602/520
2,441 posts, read 7,009,624 times
Reputation: 1815
You live in San Diego and didn't know that LA has a subway?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-22-2008, 07:22 PM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
18,982 posts, read 32,656,174 times
Reputation: 13635
Quote:
Originally Posted by Billiam View Post
That's very true. But to me, i feel the bigger the city, the more riders it should have, the larger it should be but thats just not the case with LA. I don't think its unfair to compare the two though. A metro with 17-18 million should have a larger and more riden subway than a metro of 8-10 million
But it doesn't have a larger metro rail system or one even close to the size of DC's so that's how it's an unfair comparison and that is my point; the size of the city isn't that relevant when you don't have a metro system that is even comparable at all. How can you have more riders when you have a much, much smaller metro rail system? LA should have a larger one, that's pretty obvious. But it doesn't so what is the point of even trying to compare them. Compare DC to Chicago or NYC since they both have an extensive heavy rail system, unlike LA. Would you compare DC's ridership to that of Houston's, Atlanta's, or Miami's rail systems? Both have a similar metro population of around 5-6 million. I don't include Baltimore in DC's metro population since the Metro Rail doesn't service that area. When LA's metro rail system has a similar amount of route miles and stations as DC's Metro then you can FAIRLY compare them, but until that is reality then it's a completely unfair comparison and a pretty ridiculous one too.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-22-2008, 07:58 PM
 
Location: moving again
4,383 posts, read 16,766,060 times
Reputation: 1681
Quote:
Originally Posted by sav858 View Post
But it doesn't have a larger metro rail system or one even close to the size of DC's so that's how it's an unfair comparison and that is my point; the size of the city isn't that relevant when you don't have a metro system that is even comparable at all. How can you have more riders when you have a much, much smaller metro rail system? LA should have a larger one, that's pretty obvious. But it doesn't so what is the point of even trying to compare them. Compare DC to Chicago or NYC since they both have an extensive heavy rail system, unlike LA. Would you compare DC's ridership to that of Houston's, Atlanta's, or Miami's rail systems? Both have a similar metro population of around 5-6 million. I don't include Baltimore in DC's metro population since the Metro Rail doesn't service that area. When LA's metro rail system has a similar amount of route miles and stations as DC's Metro then you can FAIRLY compare them, but until that is reality then it's a completely unfair comparison and a pretty ridiculous one too.
Sorry, had no idea it was forbidden to make 'rediculous' (in your opinion) comparisons
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-22-2008, 10:28 PM
 
Location: San Diego
936 posts, read 3,191,010 times
Reputation: 467
Quote:
Originally Posted by miamiman View Post
You live in San Diego and didn't know that LA has a subway?
you'd be surprised how many San Diegans don't know LA has a subway system. I'm sure a lot of people even in orange, riverside, san bernardino, Ventura, and even LA county don't know LA has a subway system. Its a very 'esoteric' public transportation system in the southland.

Anyway, I don't think anyone from san diego in this thread said they didn't know LA had a subway system.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-11-2008, 11:44 PM
 
1 posts, read 1,517 times
Reputation: 10
The questions asks "had" a subway becuase they are referring to the old original subway system that existed in L.A. and was dismantled with the car boom in the 50's. No one ever talks about this, but History channel "Cities of the underwold" finally made a show with a segment discussing this very topic.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-12-2008, 02:35 PM
 
Location: Brooklyn
40,050 posts, read 34,603,290 times
Reputation: 10616
Quote:
Originally Posted by Billiam View Post
Because i feel LA should have a better and bigger system than DC. Its not that unfair when you factor in the size of the cities
Let's see...perhaps the size of the system has something to do with the usage it gets? People in DC actually use their subway, while you can look it up: the majority of ridership in LA consists of tourists.

There's also the problem of mindset to overcome; LA has a reputation for being a car city. When the people there start agitating for more mass transit, they'll get it.

As to "better," well, that's kind of subjective, don't you think?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-12-2008, 02:42 PM
 
Location: moving again
4,383 posts, read 16,766,060 times
Reputation: 1681
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fred314X View Post
Let's see...perhaps the size of the system has something to do with the usage it gets? People in DC actually use their subway, while you can look it up: the majority of ridership in LA consists of tourists.

There's also the problem of mindset to overcome; LA has a reputation for being a car city. When the people there start agitating for more mass transit, they'll get it.

As to "better," well, that's kind of subjective, don't you think?
i didn't know that about how the majority of people who use it are tourists! that's kind of hard to imagine

When i said better i didn't mean like nicer or cleaner, just like bigger and more extensive
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:


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 > General U.S.
Similar Threads

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