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.
I don't know if I would consider the city of Atlanta "conservative." In last few presidential elections, Fulton County went blue. Now the surrounding metro and state of Georgia could be considered conservative, and I think you would find that in several of these more conservative areas, there seems to be more opposition to transit. For example, Cobb County, which is directly northwest of Atlanta, has consistently voted against allowing a MARTA line pass through the county, most likely because they want to avoid bringing "those people" into their neighborhood.
There were posts about the risk of "those people" today in our local paper about a transit line extending into San Jose. And Silicon Valley is very liberal.
*Those people in this case is code word for scary black/brown male criminals. Apparently many people in the Bay Area think criminals have all the time in the world to drive 40 miles in traffic to steal or sell drugs instead of sticking closer to home. Like criminals do not put a value on their time. It would be a pretty hilarious sketch comedy though, if they showed criminals "commuting" for crime.
As far as these car services, e-go (I think that's the name) in Denver says do not rely on it as your sole source of transportation; that if you have to go to the hospital or whatever you should always have a backup. They recommend asking a friend! Now what if your friend isn't available? Then what?
I would take mass transit to school but there isn't any form of rail anywhere close by and the buses are too damn slow! I do walk to work though (if that counts as mass transit?).
*Those people in this case is code word for scary black/brown male criminals. Apparently many people in the Bay Area think criminals have all the time in the world to drive 40 miles in traffic to steal or sell drugs instead of sticking closer to home. Like criminals do not put a value on their time. It would be a pretty hilarious sketch comedy though, if they showed criminals "commuting" for crime.
Criminals DO commute. Not for selling drugs (though some deliver!), but for car theft, carjacking, and high-value burglary/home invasion.
Criminals DO commute. Not for selling drugs (though some deliver!), but for car theft, carjacking, and high-value burglary/home invasion.
Have you been in Bay Area traffic? You would spend your whole crime filled afternoon stuck in traffic. And your pass plenty of targets on the way to San Jose. No criminal is traveling. 40-50 miles for petty crime.
*Those people in this case is code word for scary black/brown male criminals. Apparently many people in the Bay Area think criminals have all the time in the world to drive 40 miles in traffic to steal or sell drugs instead of sticking closer to home. Like criminals do not put a value on their time. It would be a pretty hilarious sketch comedy though, if they showed criminals "commuting" for crime.
This was an argument against the RiverLine in NJ that connects Camden and Trenton (passing through suburban Burlington Co. along the way). Hilarious.
I posted this in a different thread
"OK, dude from the ghetto is gonna take the bus out to some upper middle-class neighborhood he doesn't know very well and walk around casing the joint. He won't raise any suspicions at all.
Then he's gonna back and do it a few more times until he gets people's patterns down. No one will think it's weird to see some thug they've never seen before walking around the neighborhood for a few days in a row. No one will call the police.
Then he'll come back to burglarize. He'll time it perfectly. Since the bus only runs once an hour he'll wander the neighborhood for 50 minutes then he'll break in giving himself just enough time to get what he wants and run back to the bus stop.
He'll steal your desktop, your jewelry and your flat screen tv and he'll run down to the corner with it (this won't tip anyone off) and, as we know, buses that only run every hour are always on time so he'll hop on the bus with your schwag and the bus driver won't think it strange at all. Then, because no one notices, he'll continue on back to the 'hood with all your stuff on a bus with a radio link, a security camera and maybe 10 other passengers. " . . . and the cops will never be able to ID him.
This part struck me as really silly and indicative of the amateurish nature of the essay
Affluent Customers Will Not Use Mass Transit. It's not that they're selfish, or that they don't care about the environment. It's not cost-effective. The higher your salary, the more wasteful mass transit is. The only significant exception is commuter rail provided the fares offer a savings over driving and parking and the comfort and privacy allow relaxation or work en route.
This basically says "affluent customers will not use mass transit except when they do."
The correlation between higher incomes and commuter rail and ferry service has been well known for decades.
Occasionally there is a high-profile news story about someone getting arrested on the bus or light rail because they were caught on security camera after committing some crime, and people use it as an excuse to talk about the danger of public transit, but forget that the guy got caught because he took public transit! If he had a car, he would have gotten away without witnesses.
the government doesn't invest in it. Plus, some places don't have the population density
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.