[PRCo] Re: pat__service__cuts__2007.01.23-changed to 2/1/07

[Joshua Dunfield]

John Swindler wrote:
> 
> The national averages will be skewed towards auto assembly plants in rural 
> Ohio, where everyone must drive to get to work.  Transit is not an option.  
> That's why the term "peer group" might give a better picture.   
> Unfortunately, that will be  a lot more difficult to develope.  National 
> average is meaningless to individual situations.

Well, in this case the Pittsburgh-specific numbers aren't that different.
I have seen figures of 40%+ transit for Pittsburgh-city-resident-to-Downtown,
but make the set small enough and you can get whatever you want.

> And besides, if you stop for a lottery ticket at the convenience store on 
> way home, is that one auto trip or two trips?  And how are the transit trips 
> being counted?  Person trips or boarding passengers?  Doesn't mean much in 
> Pittsburgh, but a significantly different number in grid pattern cities like 
> Chicago, Los Angeles, etc.  And do you count teachers driving to school as a 
> auto work trip, but what about the students on the school bus?  Are they in 
> the transit count?  And if not, why not?  Could it be to skew the numbers 
> towards auto?

The numbers I posted are from the census long form.  They ask only how you get
to work.  I don't remember the exact wording, but you only get to choose one
thing, so a bus trip with 0, 1, 2, 3 transfers is one person checking "bus",
and a car trip with five stops is still one person checking "car".  Kids on
a school bus aren't going to "work", at least, no one calls it that.

-j.