> As a non-car owner, I ride the bus almost daily. > The average bus rider is less capable than the average Universality educated white collar tech worker in t

> As a non-car owner, I ride the bus almost daily. > The average bus rider is less capable than the average Universality educated white collar tech worker in the professional sense, You ride the bus. Some university educated white collar tech workers ride the bus. So why even bring up the bus? Denigrating bus riders doesn't help your argument at all, it's a red herring, as is speaking of "average" people, because averages often overlook the wide range of values within the population. > at least in terms of wage earning potential. That's not the interesting question here, otherwise "we have a meritocracy" would be almost a tautology. > 'The bus' (esp. not the subway) is the domain of the urban working class - full stop. Maybe we shouldn't full stop, but rather talk about the demographics of the urban working class... > "is more environmentally friendly" - this is irrelevant to the argument - the question is, why imbue the debate with side-show moralizing? Because riding the bus could be seen as a sign of conscientiousness, education, and intelligence, in contrast to your characterization of bus riders, and refusal to ride the bus as a sign of selfishness and immorality. Personally, I make no generalizations about bus riders. I tended to keep to myself on public transportation and thought it strange when someone wanted to talk to a stranger out of the blue. So it would be very unlikely for anyone to have experienced an intelligent, interesting conversation with me on the bus, regardless of my level of intelligence. > the system is crudely meritocratic This is not the defense you think it is. Few think the system is entirely random, or on the other hand, perfect. The level of crudeness is precisely why we're constantly debating the system.