5 ms·
The article cites national statistics. Is your argument that those national statistics are being driven entirely by changes in rich cities? That the changes i
by freddie_mercury 4y ago
The article cites national statistics.
Is your argument that those national statistics are being driven entirely by changes in rich cities?
That the changes in driving habits have been so large that it drags down the bottom 60%.
The article says that in 1997 43% of 16-year olds had a driver's licence but by 2020 it had fallee to 20%.
Since you're claiming that's entirely driven by the richest 40% let's do some simple math to quantify the implications of your claim.
If richest 40% of 16 year olds had 0 driver's licences... Not a single one in the entire country... Then the national rate would have fallen to 25% not 20%. So the richest 40% must actually have NEGATIVE driver's for the math to work out on your claim.
Or maybe it isn't just a phenomenon limited the rich places.