Steve Sailer writes: Houston is extremely flat, but has a lot of big trees, an impressive skyline, nice clouds, and fine sunsets. San Francisco is obviously unique, but Houston outpointed Los Angeles in the late 1970s on trees, skyline, clouds, and sunsets.
Is “walkability” a euphemism for “you can have a few drinks with dinner at the restaurant and not have to risk a DUI?” That’s a nice amenity, but if that’s what this euphemism means, can we spell it out?
“Walkability” also means I don’t have to be a taxi for my kids’ activities.”
That would be great, but that seems to come more with suburban than with urban life.
Okay, here’s a way to compare public transportation to work across cities, apples to apples. (This isn’t walkability in your home neighborhood, it’s your opportunity to ditch driving to work.) Most cities have a downtown where a lot of lawyers work. What percentage of married lawyers between 35 and 60 who work downtown take public transportation (including commuter trains) to work at least 3 days a week?
That seems like a pretty fair comparison across cities.
Hallie: What percentage of married lawyers between 35 and 60 who work downtown take public transportation (including commuter trains) to work at least 3 days a week?
None that I’m aware of (in St Louis).
Steve Sailer writes: Probably very few in Los Angeles either. I watched people get off the subway in North Hollywood last year at rush hour, and maybe 1%-2% of the men looked like lawyers.
Probably some lawyers take buses down Wilshire. And there’s now a trolley from Pasadena. I talked to a professional who rode that to downtown.
In Chicago, however, lots of men in good suits take the commuter trains from the suburbs to the Loop. It’s a pretty pleasant lifestyle.
