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.
Los Angeles has a metro area transit commute modal share of 11.2%
Saskatoon has a metro area transit commute modal share of 4.2%
Quit lying NOLA.
Those are city proper stats not metro area stats.
Edit: whoops, you're realized that. And no the chart isn't bad up, the few metros I checked are close to the official stats, with any discrepancy could be due to the year.
Sorry, I'm not letting this go. You made the claim that Saskatoon has a higher transit share than Los Angeles. I've posted links showing that Los Angeles has a higher transit share - both city and metro - than Saskatoon.
And, again, you got banned from SSP for posting this chart and calling everyone a liar, and you're doing the same thing here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TowerMan2
Now prove to me that you're not a liar, and show that the numbers in the chart are "made up", and that Saskatoon really does have a higher transit share than Los Angeles.
We already know the transit share in Canada is much higher than that of the U.S.
So yeah, pretty much everywhere in Canada will have higher transit share than U.S. equivalents, which you know destroys your "transit share determines relative urbanity" argument.
Now you can call me a "lying liar", you can post your made-up chart again, you can argue that Saskatoon and Victoria and Winnipeg are a big cities because more people ride the bus than in the U.S., and we can rinse, repeat, until you're banned.
Edit: whoops, you're realized that. And no the chart isn't bad up, the few metros I checked are close to the official stats, with any discrepancy could be due to the year.
Yep. NOLA is caught in another lie. Those numbers are 100% correct.
I'm still waiting fror him to show me where I claimed that Toronto has auto development that predates the automobile.
Yep. NOLA is caught in another lie. Those numbers are 100% correct.
I'm still waiting fror him to show me where I claimed that Toronto has auto development that predates the automobile.
You already claimed that "Canada is unique in the world in the pre-auto development is postwar". So obviously you were claiming that the auto-oriented development in the GTA predates WW2. This was right after you claimed that Yonge/Egligton suburban homes were more urban than Yonge/Dundas, and right before you claimed that Canadian cities were more urban because more people happen to ride the bus.
In short, if the pre-auto development is occuring in the postwar era, then obviously you're claiming the auto-oriented development predates the dominance of the auto. Eaton Centre has a giant garage entrance right on Yonge, and is a huge postwar development, so unless Google Maps is "lying" as you claim everyone is doing, then there must be some vast paranoid conspiracy afoot to hide the relative urbanity of Toronto's postwar development.
And, again, you got banned from SSP for posting this chart and calling everyone a liar, and you're doing the same thing here.
I'm still waiting for you to post links to the actual stats if the ones in that chart are made up. You can cross-reference them with the actual census. They are not made up.
Quote:
Now you can call me a "lying liar", you can post your made-up chart again, you can argue that Saskatoon and Victoria and Winnipeg are a big cities because more people ride the bus than in the U.S., and we can rinse, repeat, until you're banned.
I'm not letting this go. You've claimed that Saskatoon has a higher transit share than Los Angeles. If you're not lying, post a link (or multiple links) proving it.
I'm still waiting for you to post links to the actual stats if the ones in that chart are made up. You can cross-reference them with the actual census. They are not made up.
I already know Canada has higher transit share. You can call everyone a liar, and post your chart that got you banned, but it won't change reality.
Here's a good comparison of transit share between U.S., Canadian and Australian cities. Essentially the least transit-oriented Canadian cities on the list are more transit oriented than the most transit oriented U.S. cities (again, excepting NYC). Though I'm sure you'll call this blogger a "liar".
The fact is that transit share does not determine relative urbanity, unless you think LA is less urban than some Canadian (and other) small towns. Victoria and Winnipeg, relatively small cities, have higher transit share than Boston, SF, and DC, three U.S. cities every bit as urban as Montreal or Toronto (perhaps more).
If Winnipeg and Victoria have higher transit share than Boston, DC, and SF, then they absolutely slaughter LA in transit share. If you then truly think Winnipeg is more urban than LA, then be my guest...
You already claimed that "Canada is unique in the world in the pre-auto development is postwar".
No I didn't. Show me the exact post where I said that. You actually quoted me, so I want you to tell me the post number where I said exactly what you've quoted.
Quote:
So obviously you were claiming that the auto-oriented development in the GTA predates WW2.
LOL. You said that I made the claim that auto-oriented development predates the automobile, not that I made the claim that auto-oriented development predates WW2 (I never said that either for that matter). Now tell me the post number where I made the claim that auto-oriented development predates the automobile in Canada.
Quote:
This was right after you claimed that Yonge/Egligton suburban homes were more urban than Yonge/Dundas
No. I never mentioned Yonge/Dundas once in this entire thread. BTW, there are no homes at Yonge and Dundas. It's all commercial and a public plaza. Again, tell me the post number where I said that Yonge/Eglinton (not "Eglington" you ignoramus) homes are more urban than Yonge/Dundas homes.
Quote:
In short, if the pre-auto development is occuring in the postwar era, then obviously you're claiming the auto-oriented development predates the dominance of the auto.
No. I'm not interested in your interpretation of what you THINK I meant. You said that I claimed that auto-oriented development in Toronto predates the automobile. I want you to show me where I made that actual claim.
You claimed that Saskatoon has a higher transit share than Los Angeles. I'm waiting for a link to the "real numbers" that prove this.
I don't care about Canada having a higher transit share than Los Angeles. That's not that claim I'm refuting. I'm refuting your false claim that Saskatoon has a higher transit share than Los Angeles. And I'm not letting it go until you post proof.
I already know Canada has higher transit share. You can call everyone a liar, and post your chart that got you banned, but it won't change reality.
Here's a good comparison of transit share between U.S., Canadian and Australian cities. Essentially the least transit-oriented Canadian cities on the list are more transit oriented than the most transit oriented U.S. cities (again, excepting NYC). Though I'm sure you'll call this blogger a "liar".
The fact is that transit share does not determine relative urbanity, unless you think LA is less urban than some Canadian (and other) small towns. Victoria and Winnipeg, relatively small cities, have higher transit share than Boston, SF, and DC, three U.S. cities every bit as urban as Montreal or Toronto (perhaps more).
No. I never said Canada doesn't have higher transit share than the United States. Of course it does.
You claimed that Saskatoon has higher transit share than Los Angeles. I called this claim a lie, and wait for you to prove this claim to be true.
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.
