3 ms·
The logic as I understand it is quite straightforward. Google could have it employees use public transit to serve the mass transit need. This is what is done in
by mpyne 13y ago
The logic as I understand it is quite straightforward. Google could have it employees use public transit to serve the mass transit need. This is what is done in NYC and DC, for the most part. An interesting exception being DoD shuttle buses that run from e.g. the Pentagon metro stop to nearby other military offices (this despite the Arlington bus transit system being arguably superior).
I'm assuming Google's problem with that is that the public transit sucks over there, but it will never get fixed by building out an entirely separate mass transit system. On the other hand I'm not sure how you magically fix their mass transit just by wanting to be on those buses. Even if Google funds it I'm not sure how it's guaranteed those funds go toward fixing mass transit quickly (and sustainably).
TL;DR: They're mad because public transit would be better for everybody if Mr. Moneybags would actually have his cadre of Baby Moneybagses ride the public transit too. They're not Luddites though, they'd be fine with tech if it wasn't making a caste system.
- jey 13y agoThis is clearly not the real problem. It's supposedly a symbol of the real problem, but I don't understand what that is. Supposedly something to do with entitlement and income disparity. I was most able to understand this on an emotional level in this article: http://www.npr.org/blogs/alltechconsidered/2013/12/17/251992536/security-guards-at-big-tech-companies-struggle-with-low-pay http://www.npr.org/blogs/alltechconsidered/2013/12/17/251992...
- mpyne 13y agoPerhaps. I'd have to dive waaaay deeper than I have time to to sort our rhetoric from the underlying issues of contention. I'd be interested as to why they fixate on Google in particular for income disparity but it wouldn't surprise me either.