San Francisco named "second best" transit city in the USA (San Diego: calculator, salary)

[sav858]

Originally Posted by ExeterMedia

Classy.



This is too general. What does a "mix of all" actually mean?

You said "industry professionals and planners see a healthy socioeconomic mix as a good thing in transit." Can you explain the heuristic professionals and planners use to determine what is healthy? Even show a source which explains and defines this? Maybe it's my Alzheimer's, but I don't have anymore clarification than when you previously made that statement.

No offense intended if that's the case, it's hard to tell these things over the internet.

A mix of captive and choice riders. If you're getting people who can otherwise drive to take transit then that's definitely seen as a good thing.

[ExeterMedia]

Originally Posted by sav858

A mix of captive and choice riders.

lol, what does this mean in percentages or numbers? What is the mix? How is a "healthy" mix determined?

[ExeterMedia]

Originally Posted by Folks3000

Not to focus on only one thing, but the tech companies did it to themselves by building in the dumbest places imaginable.

Blame Stanford.

[sav858]

Originally Posted by ExeterMedia

lol, what does this mean in percentages or numbers? What is the mix? How is a "healthy" mix determined?

There isn't some numerical industry standard here for this as far as I know. I'd imagine it could vary among communities too. But there is a lot of literature out there on the subject so feel free to go out there and educate yourself

[ExeterMedia]

Originally Posted by sav858

There isn't some numerical industry standard here for this as far as I know. I'd imagine it could vary among communities too. But there is a lot of literature out there on the subject so feel free to go out there and educate yourself

Why would I do your work for you?

You made the statement...

Originally Posted by sav858

You are certainly entitled to believe that, but industry professionals and planners see a healthy socioeconomic mix as a good thing in transit.

It would follow that you should define the parameters of what is considered a "healthy socioeconomic mix" using verifiable sources being used by major transit systems around the country. You made the claim, at least try to stand by it.

Yet you have not done this and instead say "educate yourself". This is either because you don't know what the industry standard is or what the literature says (in which case you are talking upon a subject you know nothing about), or you simply made all of that up. Either way, what a waste of time.

[sav858]

Originally Posted by ExeterMedia

Why would I do your work for you?

ummm you're the one inquiring about it, not me. I guess you got confused there again LOL.

You made the statement...

It would follow that you should define the parameters of what is considered a "healthy socioeconomic mix" using verifiable sources being used by major transit systems around the country.

Yet you have not done this and instead say "educate yourself". This is either because you don't know what the industry standard is or what the literature says (in which case you are talking upon a subject you know nothing about), or you simply made all of that up. Either way, what a waste of time.

I don't have specific numbers and I'm not even sure there is some numerical industry standard for that. But since you're the one who really wants to know, feel free to go find out.

I already did the work for you when it came to answering the question about transit user demographics, now you need more information spoon fed to you? Sorry but I find that very lazy and you really should learn find information on your own if you want to know something instead of always relying on others to educate you.

[ExeterMedia]

Originally Posted by sav858

ummm you're the one inquiring about it, not me. I guess you got confused there again LOL.

I don't have specific numbers and I'm not even sure there is some numerical industry standard for that. But since you're the one who really wants to know, feel free to go find out.

I already did the work for you when it came to answering the question about transit user demographics, now you need more information spoon fed to you? Sorry but I find that very lazy and you really should learn find information on your own if you want to know something instead of always relying on others to educate you.

I never made the original claims about transit demographics in LA, and I never made the claim about "healthy socio economic mix". That's why I asked others to cite their sources.

If I did make those claims, yes, I would definitely go and find the information and relay it to others because I do not want to make statements that are not backed by verifiable sources when I am no expert in the topic being discussed.

In fact one of the rules of this very sub-forum pertains to exactly what you are doing.

Sweeping generalizations and broad statements will NOT be tolerated. Such posts will be deleted and/or the thread closed, and infractions issued as appropriate. Please post a link to your source when quoting statistics, and please use recent stats.

So again, I ask you can you cite a link or source to support your claim about "healthy socioeconomic mixes" being good for transit, and actually define what that is? If you can't, just say you don't know, it's okay, I won't be mad but at least we know you were not speaking from a position of knowledge.

[sav858]

Originally Posted by ExeterMedia

I never made the original claims about transit demographics in LA,

But you did ask for data to support that claim, which was presented to you.

and I never made the claim about "healthy socio economic mix". That's why I asked others to cite their sources.

If I did make those claims, yes, I would definitely go and find the information and relay it to others because I do not want to make statements that are not backed by verifiable sources when I am no expert in the topic being discussed.

Well then it that case:

-What do you define as "very poor" for SF? What exact numbers are considered very poor and who defines that?

Originally Posted by ExeterMedia

San Francisco does skew very poor

So again, I ask you can you cite a link or source to support your claim about "healthy socioeconomic mixes" being good for transit, and actually define what that is? If you can't, just say you don't know, it's okay, I won't be mad but at least we know you were not speaking from a position of knowledge.

For the third or fourth time, I don't believe there is some numerical industry standard for that as that appears to be what you're looking for. I'm not sure how many times I need to state that for you to understand. BTW, I never quoted a statistic there. A "healthy socioeconimic mix" is a fairly general statement, but feel free to report that if you really think it violated the TOS LOL.

[ExeterMedia]

Originally Posted by sav858

For the third or fourth time, I don't believe there is some numerical industry standard for that as that appears to be what you're looking for.

So how does one determine a "healthy socioeconomic mix" if not through some numerical heuristic or standard?

[04kL4nD]

I still would love to see data that LA transit is comprised of the same levels of choice ridership as cities like SF, DC, NYC, BOS, CHI.

I'll totally take back what I said about poor people being the ones who ride it in LA.