3 ms·

Washington is on the western side of the US, opposite boston. Are you thinking of New York? While the points you make are interesting, there is a massive swath

by dmbche 3y ago

Washington is on the western side of the US, opposite boston. Are you thinking of New York? While the points you make are interesting, there is a massive swath of the us in between New York and LA, and I think that's where the argument is made. I'm in Canada with 38 millions individuals in the second largest country in the world, I can assure you it's quite different from Europe. (Edit: just looked it up and we get about 15 people per mile!) On average, North Americans also drive about double the distance europeans do per year.

danabrams 3y ago
From context they are almost certainly referring to the city of Washington (DC), which is part of the northeast corridor described, and not the state of Washington, which is on the west coast.
- dmbche 3y ago
  It's been years I thought it was near Seattle or something. How did I get this mixed up? Feels like a Bernstein bear kind of thing. Thank you for the correction.
ta1243 3y ago
On average most Canadians do not drive from Ottawa to Vancouver. 95% of Canadians who drive on a commute in 2016 drove for under 1 hour, which can reasonably be approximated to under 50 miles [0] If you remove the 3 territories the population of Canada doesn't change but the density pretty much doubles. 99.99% of Canadians have never even been to one of the territories. In the US, adding Alaska to the union made no difference to the viability of public transport, but massively reduced population density. Looking at the density of a large country is meaningless. Just because Scotland has a population density the same as Michigan doesn't mean that the Central Belt can't maintain a decent public transport system. The density of that area of Scotland is around the Netherlands level. What's important in the density of a specific economic area. [0] https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/75-006-x/2019001/article/00002-eng.htm https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/75-006-x/2019001/article...
- dmbche 3y ago
  The 15 people per mile was for my province, Quebec, not the whole country. For Canada it's 4.2, half of what Russia gets at 8. something You seem to take this to heart so I'll leave you to it.

by dmbche 3y ago

danabrams 3y ago

From context they are almost certainly referring to the city of Washington (DC), which is part of the northeast corridor described, and not the state of Washington, which is on the west coast.

dmbche 3y ago
It's been years I thought it was near Seattle or something. How did I get this mixed up? Feels like a Bernstein bear kind of thing. Thank you for the correction.

ta1243 3y ago

On average most Canadians do not drive from Ottawa to Vancouver. 95% of Canadians who drive on a commute in 2016 drove for under 1 hour, which can reasonably be approximated to under 50 miles [0] If you remove the 3 territories the population of Canada doesn't change but the density pretty much doubles. 99.99% of Canadians have never even been to one of the territories. In the US, adding Alaska to the union made no difference to the viability of public transport, but massively reduced population density. Looking at the density of a large country is meaningless. Just because Scotland has a population density the same as Michigan doesn't mean that the Central Belt can't maintain a decent public transport system. The density of that area of Scotland is around the Netherlands level. What's important in the density of a specific economic area. [0] https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/75-006-x/2019001/article/00002-eng.htm https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/75-006-x/2019001/article...

dmbche 3y ago
The 15 people per mile was for my province, Quebec, not the whole country. For Canada it's 4.2, half of what Russia gets at 8. something You seem to take this to heart so I'll leave you to it.