ATLANTA TRANSIT (Marta, Beltline, Peachtree Streetcar, LovJoy Commuter, etc...) - Page 61

BabydaddyATL · #**1201** Posted **Apr 25, 2008, 9:31 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by sprtsluvr8

I'm sensing a secret crush on Andrea...I think you want to be her babydaddy, but I think she may be spoken for already.

I am a cougar chaser. Plus I think she has more money than me.

I need some way to pay for these damn high gas prices!!!!

sprtsluvr8 · #**1202** Posted **Apr 25, 2008, 9:31 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by BabydaddyATL

I have no idea what you are trying to say.

Atlanta has the second highest commutes in the country. What does this mean? They don't give a damn about gas prices, they don't live where they work and they prefer to live in a big suburban home a opposed to a smaller house in the the city.

And...you know this because...you've done extensive research on the subject? You are stating this based on your opinion. Don't try to make it factual.

BabydaddyATL · #**1203** Posted **Apr 25, 2008, 9:32 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by sprtsluvr8

Oh my God, are you kidding me? Panhandling is nonexistent in most in-town neighborhoods. It is basically common to parts of Downtown and isolated areas of Midtown, to a lesser extent. I would venture to say that most people in the suburbs or anywhere else don't associate panhandling with, say, Virginina-Highland.

I was being a smartass to NativeAtlantan.

sprtsluvr8 · #**1204** Posted **Apr 25, 2008, 9:34 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by BabydaddyATL

I was being a smartass to NativeAtlantan.

Ok, thank you...I was hoping you weren't serious...

BabydaddyATL · #**1205** Posted **Apr 25, 2008, 9:36 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by sprtsluvr8

And...you know this because...you've done extensive research on the subject? You are stating this based on your opinion. Don't try to make it factual.

Sorry #5 in the US.

1. Vineland, N.J. 39.6
2. New York 34.2
3. Washington, D.C. 33.4
4. Poughkeepsie, N.Y. 32.2
5. Atlanta 31.1
6. Riverside, Calif. 31.1
7. Chicago 31.0
8. Winchester, Va. 29.7
9. Stockton, Calif. 29.4
10. Vallejo-Fairfield, Calif. 29.2

sprtsluvr8 · #**1206** Posted **Apr 25, 2008, 9:42 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by BabydaddyATL

Sorry #5 in the US.

1. Vineland, N.J. 39.6
2. New York 34.2
3. Washington, D.C. 33.4
4. Poughkeepsie, N.Y. 32.2
5. Atlanta 31.1
6. Riverside, Calif. 31.1
7. Chicago 31.0
8. Winchester, Va. 29.7
9. Stockton, Calif. 29.4
10. Vallejo-Fairfield, Calif. 29.2

Um...#5 in what? People who don't care about gas prices? That list doesn't prove anything, and definitely does not lead to your conclusion...

BabydaddyATL · #**1207** Posted **Apr 25, 2008, 9:42 PM**

Can Someone Slap Me?

I think I am in a coma. Last time I checked, the city of Atlanta only had a population of 500,000, was growing at 10-15,000 residents a years, poor density, gas prices were $3.60, had a metro of over 5 Million, MSA growing over 100,000 new residents a year, long commutes, was spread out, fast growing suburbs....

BabydaddyATL · #**1208** Posted **Apr 25, 2008, 9:43 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by sprtsluvr8

Um...#5 in what?

In average commute time. 31.1 minutes.

sprtsluvr8 · #**1209** Posted **Apr 25, 2008, 9:49 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by BabydaddyATL

In average commute time. 31.1 minutes.

NYC is #3...so what?

sprtsluvr8 · #**1210** Posted **Apr 25, 2008, 9:51 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by BabydaddyATL

Can Someone Slap Me?

I think I am in a coma. Last time I checked, the city of Atlanta only had a population of 500,000, was growing at 10-15,000 residents a years, poor density, gas prices were $3.60, had a metro of over 5 Million, MSA growing over 100,000 new residents a year, long commutes, was spread out, fast growing suburbs....

All that to say...what? People don't consider gas prices when deciding where to live? That's absurd! People consider any and all expenses when making any decision. Gas prices have just recently (in the last 2 years) become an issue...and Atlanta's population has just begun to rise in the last couple of years as well.

testarossa50 · #**1211** Posted **Apr 25, 2008, 9:52 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by BabydaddyATL

I have no idea what you are trying to say.

Atlanta has the second highest commutes in the country. What does this mean? They don't give a damn about gas prices, they don't live where they work and they prefer to live in a big suburban home a opposed to a smaller house in the the city.

It means that transportation has been very cheap throughout the city's growth, which has led to an extremely high degree of spatial variability in the ratio of jobs to residents across different areas. Now that transportation is more expensive, there is a new force in play that will encourage the ratio of jobs to residents to become more uniform and closer to 1 across the board.

Whether this force is a major impact or a minor impact is debatable, but it is undeniable that such a force exists. To the extent that the force exists, it will cause areas dense with jobs to attract people, and areas full of people to attract jobs.

Economically, the unit labor cost of employers in a job-heavy region will inflate more quickly than the unit-labor cost of employers in a more residential area. Residents will seek the inflated wages, and employers will avoid them. This process will be hampered by the long-term nature of employment and real estate infrastructure, but parties on both sides of the equation will begin to react; that is, unless the whole world suddenly stops caring about money.

And if you think Atlanta would look exactly the same if gas had cost 3x more for the past few decades, you're crazy.

Andrea · #**1212** Posted **Apr 25, 2008, 9:57 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by sprtsluvr8

And...wait...more jobs located in the suburbs than in Downtown, Midtown, Buckhead, Airport, and all other intown areas combined??? I think not...

Oh, yeah, by far. Currently, the city of Atlanta (all areas combined) has about 22% of the jobs in the core 10-county area. That's predicted to decline to around 17% in the next couple of decades.

BabydaddyATL · #**1213** Posted **Apr 25, 2008, 10:00 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by testarossa50

It means that transportation has been very cheap throughout the city's growth, which has led to an extremely high degree of spatial variability in the ratio of jobs to residents across different areas. Now that transportation is more expensive, there is a new force in play that will encourage the ratio of jobs to residents to become more uniform and closer to 1 across the board.

Whether this force is a major impact or a minor impact is debatable, but it is undeniable that such a force exists. To the extent that the force exists, it will cause areas dense with jobs to attract people, and areas full of people to attract jobs.

Economically, the unit labor cost of employers in a job-heavy region will inflate more quickly than the unit-labor cost of employers in a more residential area. Residents will seek the inflated wages, and employers will avoid them. This process will be hampered by the long-term nature of employment and real estate infrastructure, but parties on both sides of the equation will begin to react; that is, unless the whole world suddenly stops caring about money.

And if you think Atlanta would look exactly the same if gas had cost 3x more for the past few decades, you're crazy.

By any measure, the cost for businesses or a residents is cheaper in the suburbs.

You can argue that if Atlanta's transportation cost continue to rise, the whole region will suffer. The jobs will move elsewhere. However, transportation cost all over the country are rising.

BabydaddyATL · #**1214** Posted **Apr 25, 2008, 10:02 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrea

Oh, yeah, by far. Currently, the city of Atlanta (all areas combined) has about 22% of the jobs in the core 10-county area. That's predicted to decline to around 17% in the next couple of decades.

Andrea, facts don't matter on this board, only opinions!

BabydaddyATL · #**1215** Posted **Apr 25, 2008, 10:03 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by sprtsluvr8

All that to say...what? People don't consider gas prices when deciding where to live? That's absurd! People consider any and all expenses when making any decision. Gas prices have just recently (in the last 2 years) become an issue...and Atlanta's population has just begun to rise in the last couple of years as well.

Gas prices have risen since September 11, 2001. 7 years. Not that facts matter here!

BabydaddyATL · #**1216** Posted **Apr 25, 2008, 10:12 PM**

Just for Giggles - Facts

Worst Commute Times
1. Vineland, N.J. 39.6
2. New York 34.2
3. Washington, D.C. 33.4
4. Poughkeepsie, N.Y. 32.2
5. Atlanta 31.1
6. Riverside, Calif. 31.1
7. Chicago 31.0
8. Winchester, Va. 29.7
9. Stockton, Calif. 29.4
10. Vallejo-Fairfield, Calif. 29.2

(Bottom-Line) People in Atlanta Have and Will Continue to Move to the City from the suburbs because of GAS PRICES - All of you are right and the facts simply support your argument. Andrea, time for us to go home.

Andrea · #**1217** Posted **Apr 25, 2008, 10:22 PM**

Well, there are a lot of misconceptions about our city, and it's easy to underestimate how massively decentralized we are. The sheer numbers tell a staggering tale -- while the city is just now climbing back to its population level of 50 years, the suburbs have added close to FIVE MILLION new residents in the same time span. That's a tsunami.

If you look at where the jobs are going, it's not hard to appreciate why the suburbs will exert such a mighty pull. As I've said from the beginning, it's likely that rising gas prices -- especially as they approach $10 a gallon -- will have an influence on commuting patterns. But whether that translates into more people moving into the city limits is a much more complex question.

sprtsluvr8 · #**1218** Posted **Apr 25, 2008, 10:44 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by BabydaddyATL

Andrea, facts don't matter on this board, only opinions!

She's the only one stating facts in this arguement...

Andrea, I would watch out for that one..."Time for US to go home"???? I think you may have a stalker...

sprtsluvr8 · #**1219** Posted **Apr 25, 2008, 10:49 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrea

Oh, yeah, by far. Currently, the city of Atlanta (all areas combined) has about 22% of the jobs in the core 10-county area. That's predicted to decline to around 17% in the next couple of decades.

I have to wonder about the jobs in Clayton and Cherokee Counties and how they compare to jobs in the city...waiting tables at Olive Garden compared to a job at Coca-Cola or CNN?

testarossa50 · #**1220** Posted **Apr 25, 2008, 10:51 PM**

You are still absolutely missing the point.

Andrea--you say yourself than Atlanta only has 22% of the region's jobs. Given the city roughly has about 500,000 of the 5,000,000 people in the metro area, it only has 10% of the metro population. This indicates that as people move closer to their jobs--as you predict they will--the city's population will increase. Please explain the flaw in my logic.

I understand there are arguments to be made against this conclusion, but following your assumptions the city should increase in poulation. Edit to add: sorry didn't read your last post; I agree absolutely with that.

Quote:

By any measure, the cost for businesses or a residents is cheaper in the suburbs.

You can argue that if Atlanta's transportation cost continue to rise, the whole region will suffer. The jobs will move elsewhere. However, transportation cost all over the country are rising.

This logic is extremely unclear. The current nominal cost of doing business in a given place doesn't really matter--it's already priced into the market. What we're talking about how is how the cost of doing business is going to change.

And nobody's arguing that, so why bring it up?