<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Midwest Miscellany</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.urbanophile.com/2009/11/03/midwest-miscellany-21/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.urbanophile.com/2009/11/03/midwest-miscellany-21/</link>
	<description>Passionate About Cities</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Sep 2010 09:01:13 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: John</title>
		<link>http://www.urbanophile.com/2009/11/03/midwest-miscellany-21/comment-page-1/#comment-5664</link>
		<dc:creator>John</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Nov 2009 18:03:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.urbanophile.com/?p=989#comment-5664</guid>
		<description>Regarding the Cleveland transit graph, I have a couple of questions:
1. I would be interested to see this graph overlayed with a graph of the population of the City of Cleveland.  I would expect a close match between loss of residents (customers) and lower ridership.
2. Would other cities look much different?  I doubt it.  Most transit agencies lost a lot of ridership between the mid-70&#039;s and the mid-90&#039;s as central city populations declined.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Regarding the Cleveland transit graph, I have a couple of questions:<br />
1. I would be interested to see this graph overlayed with a graph of the population of the City of Cleveland.  I would expect a close match between loss of residents (customers) and lower ridership.<br />
2. Would other cities look much different?  I doubt it.  Most transit agencies lost a lot of ridership between the mid-70&#8217;s and the mid-90&#8217;s as central city populations declined.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Wad</title>
		<link>http://www.urbanophile.com/2009/11/03/midwest-miscellany-21/comment-page-1/#comment-5652</link>
		<dc:creator>Wad</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Nov 2009 04:39:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.urbanophile.com/?p=989#comment-5652</guid>
		<description>California is exceptionally bad off, but the problems are far above the pay grade of the think tank types.

Taxes are high, but cutting taxes won&#039;t result in a corresponding cut in the cost of living.

The cost of living in California is high not only because of supply and demand, but also because of the expectation of supply and demand. Costs will remain high in California because the state is expected to continue to grow economically and demographically.

Has the sun finally set on the Golden State? We only know if the few bad years of California are going to be like the decades of stagnation in the Rust Belt.

The reason why California has remained resilient despite cost arbitrage of states in the South and the Southwest have to do with the state being able to leverage its natural and social capital.

California&#039;s natural advantages include pleasant weather, beautiful scenery and tremendously productive agriculture. California also has very busy Pacific ports in the Bay Area and Southern California, as well as a minor but still vital inland river port in Sacramento.

California&#039;s social capital comes from attracting people not only from other parts of the country, but also the world. We have a lot of problems with immigration, but it also does confer strong economic bonds between the home countries and California. If California&#039;s economy suffers, so will the economies of Mexico, Central America, and much of Asia.

California also has a diversified economy, so our population is not dependent on a single industry or locked into an economic strategy. Arizona and Nevada, both of the places that were supposed to bleed California dry, have long been dependent on momentum growth. It worked to the extent that people could be counted on to keep coming, yet the lack of an economic bedrock and locational disadvantages leave them in far direr straits.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>California is exceptionally bad off, but the problems are far above the pay grade of the think tank types.</p>
<p>Taxes are high, but cutting taxes won&#8217;t result in a corresponding cut in the cost of living.</p>
<p>The cost of living in California is high not only because of supply and demand, but also because of the expectation of supply and demand. Costs will remain high in California because the state is expected to continue to grow economically and demographically.</p>
<p>Has the sun finally set on the Golden State? We only know if the few bad years of California are going to be like the decades of stagnation in the Rust Belt.</p>
<p>The reason why California has remained resilient despite cost arbitrage of states in the South and the Southwest have to do with the state being able to leverage its natural and social capital.</p>
<p>California&#8217;s natural advantages include pleasant weather, beautiful scenery and tremendously productive agriculture. California also has very busy Pacific ports in the Bay Area and Southern California, as well as a minor but still vital inland river port in Sacramento.</p>
<p>California&#8217;s social capital comes from attracting people not only from other parts of the country, but also the world. We have a lot of problems with immigration, but it also does confer strong economic bonds between the home countries and California. If California&#8217;s economy suffers, so will the economies of Mexico, Central America, and much of Asia.</p>
<p>California also has a diversified economy, so our population is not dependent on a single industry or locked into an economic strategy. Arizona and Nevada, both of the places that were supposed to bleed California dry, have long been dependent on momentum growth. It worked to the extent that people could be counted on to keep coming, yet the lack of an economic bedrock and locational disadvantages leave them in far direr straits.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steven Vance</title>
		<link>http://www.urbanophile.com/2009/11/03/midwest-miscellany-21/comment-page-1/#comment-5618</link>
		<dc:creator>Steven Vance</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 07 Nov 2009 08:34:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.urbanophile.com/?p=989#comment-5618</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m not sure everyone who reads the NYT article about Vélib bike sharing is understanding  the &quot;other picture:&quot; The vandals are likely disenfranchised youth who see bicycling (the lowly act of riding a bicycle through/around town) as an urban middle class activity. The same youth who burned cars in 2005.
That&#039;s the real news in the story.

And though we don&#039;t have a vandalism (or hate) problem in the United States, we still have a problem about encouraging (marketing to) people to ride bikes for more activity types (including trips).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m not sure everyone who reads the NYT article about Vélib bike sharing is understanding  the &#8220;other picture:&#8221; The vandals are likely disenfranchised youth who see bicycling (the lowly act of riding a bicycle through/around town) as an urban middle class activity. The same youth who burned cars in 2005.<br />
That&#8217;s the real news in the story.</p>
<p>And though we don&#8217;t have a vandalism (or hate) problem in the United States, we still have a problem about encouraging (marketing to) people to ride bikes for more activity types (including trips).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alon Levy</title>
		<link>http://www.urbanophile.com/2009/11/03/midwest-miscellany-21/comment-page-1/#comment-5586</link>
		<dc:creator>Alon Levy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Nov 2009 05:51:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.urbanophile.com/?p=989#comment-5586</guid>
		<description>You&#039;d expect that the City Journal types would stop hyperventilating about taxes just enough to note that &lt;a href=&quot;http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/08/03/texas-is-not-the-only-red-state/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Texas is not the only red state&lt;/a&gt;. Overall, there seems to be no correlation between state taxes and unemployment right now. California just happens to be exceptionally badly off, and Texas exceptionally well off.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You&#8217;d expect that the City Journal types would stop hyperventilating about taxes just enough to note that <a href="http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/08/03/texas-is-not-the-only-red-state/" rel="nofollow">Texas is not the only red state</a>. Overall, there seems to be no correlation between state taxes and unemployment right now. California just happens to be exceptionally badly off, and Texas exceptionally well off.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
