Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (372192)	2/28/2008 2:30:14 AM
From: tejek	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1575517

Manhattan was dense before the subways, or even before the elevated trains you mention in a later response. Manhattan was more densely populated before 1830 than LA is today. Even in 1800 the whole island of Manhattan was at least a third of LA's current population density (despite the fact that a significant percentage of the Island was still rural), and the "populated wards" of Manhattan where almost 5 times as dense as LA is now. Density increased in Manhattan AFTER the advent of subways. Who gives a flying fukk what it was it before they arrived. LA subways might increase LA's population density, but probably not by a lot. Consider how low the percentage of commutes (or trips of all types) in LA come from subway trips. It doesn't matter whether you use passenger miles or numbers of trips the percentage is very low. We'll revisit this argument in 100 years and see where LA density levels stand.