3 ms·
1. While i can understand why certain levels of transit services required a certain baseline of usage I really don't think the scale of the exodus is sufficient
by 627467 6y ago
1. While i can understand why certain levels of transit services required a certain baseline of usage I really don't think the scale of the exodus is sufficient to warrant mass disruption of existing transit lines (maybe disrupt the development of new ones is more likely?)
2. I always prefered large cities but I wouldn't say it was mostly due to restaurants, bars and cafes. These I can find anywhere and are cheap to setup. Large city facilities and institutions like museums, theatres, government offices, sports venues, these are just some of the impossible to replace and important things that large cities still and will always have.
- ghaff 6y ago>museums, theatres, government offices, sports venues I don't know. If I want museums and theatres, I can always take a long weekend at one of the relative handful of cities that have world-class ones (that doesn't really include SF). Though, in normal times, I do have a local theatre that I attend a half-dozen times a year that's about an hour drive away. Don't care about sports. I hope to not have to go into government offices. I do like visiting nice cities but I don't need to live in one full-time to take advantage of many of the amenities. As for the transit, many cities are facing incredible budget crunches right now. There's a story in the NYT just today. And it's not just the exodus; people who don't have to aren't taking public transit. I've heard numbers like 75%+ decreases in ridership.