Many people say it is because of the work from home movement started after COVID. I notice it in reduced Metra and BART ridership. Thoughts?
They may need to reinvent themselves, like adding more weekend/night service and less rush hour trains.You mean started during Covid.
There is a fundamental change in how we do business, from the cost of housing, cost of office space. The widespread of high speed internet, and jobs that have no real need to be centrally located.
So yes transit is in transition. Where we go, and how we get there is in flux.
Additional bonus is the view on life, and the ease and plentiful possibilities of making money.
Additional bonus is the view on life, and the ease and plentiful possibilities of making money.
When the 20 something crowd is making 100k a year. I am starting to think my profession life was completely wrong.Do tell me more about the plentiful possibilities of making money!
No office workers, no support services needed. So now nobody travels on the train/subway.Here in the UK, "working from home" is a major thing now, so the need for a traditional "commute" to the office environment is much less.
The rush hour rail traffic will probably consist more of non office staff these days?
What will be even more of an impact, is the Artificial Intelligence progression, that may eliminate lots of jobs...You mean started during Covid.
There is a fundamental change in how we do business, from the cost of housing, cost of office space. The widespread of high speed internet, and jobs that have no real need to be centrally located.
So yes transit is in transition. Where we go, and how we get there is in flux.
Additional bonus is the view on life, and the ease and plentiful possibilities of making money.
My first professional job out of graduate school, age 26. Salary $17,000/ year (GS-9 step 1). That's $73,600 in today's money. Most people just out of college made less, but they pretty quickly got to my level. By the way, GS-9 step 1 now only makes about $50,000 a year in today's money. I suspect that although we read a lot about 20-somethings earning $100,000+ per year, those people represent a very, very small fraction of the 20-somethings out there.When the 20 something crowd is making 100k a year. I am starting to think my profession life was completely wrong.
No office workers, no support services needed. So now nobody travels on the train/subway.
The way it was explained to me is that if there's reduced demand, then the landlords should be lowering their rent. This doesn't seem to be happening. Obviously, our system is set up so that landlords can make money with their buildings half empty. One solution would be a tax on vacant rental property.Here in the US, there talk of a crash, both in housing and office space. Apartments building that refused to drop their rent, sitting half empty. Commercial property vacant and left to rot. This might not end well.
I saw this on the web ....What will be even more of an impact, is the Artificial Intelligence progression, that may eliminate lots of jobs...
A lot of people complained that they had it tough during the COVID lockdowns, but I also know of many people who had it real good. One of these even managed to escape to an island in Thailand where living costs are virtually nothing, while working "from home" at a salary designed to enable life in a big city. He was able to save virtually his entire income for about two years which puts him in a good place for early retirement.Do tell me more about the plentiful possibilities of making money!
The real estate market has more inertia than other sectors, partially due to contracts often being long term. But if the crash lasts long enough prices will drop. Depressions and crashes are and always have been good times to buy real estate because the market often tends to overswing, meaning there is a sweet spot during which real-estate prices are still falling while the economy as a whole is already on the rise.The way it was explained to me is that if there's reduced demand, then the landlords should be lowering their rent. This doesn't seem to be happening. Obviously, our system is set up so that landlords can make money with their buildings half empty. One solution would be a tax on vacant rental property.
drifting way off topic here.... but I think it is good to see the bar being raised as there is a lot of mediocre writing going on, especially on the corporate part of the Internet, and the agencies who create this and bill big money for it, need to wake up and either try harder or see a machine replace them.
I can’t speak for every writer in the WGA, particularly not the really good ones. But I’m not sure I personally could beat these jokes’ quality, and certainly not instantaneously, for free. Based on the secret stuff Dan’s shown me, I think it’s only a matter of time before AI will be able to beat any writer in a blind creative taste test. I’d peg it at about five years."
It's happening in Chicago.The way it was explained to me is that if there's reduced demand, then the landlords should be lowering their rent. This doesn't seem to be happening. Obviously, our system is set up so that landlords can make money with their buildings half empty. One solution would be a tax on vacant rental property.
The way it was explained to me is that if there's reduced demand, then the landlords should be lowering their rent. This doesn't seem to be happening. Obviously, our system is set up so that landlords can make money with their buildings half empty. One solution would be a tax on vacant rental property.
I think, especially in real estate, there is a difference between rents as advertised, and rents that are actually payed.3. Sheer stubbornness and denial. If a landlord has rented commercial property for $5000 before, that seems like the "natural" price, and even a drop to $4000 seems like it is unnatural and a loss.
Most transit systems do not come anywhere remotely near to breaking even at the farebox level. They are supported financially by governments and local authorities because the secondary benefits such as reduction of congestion, pollution etc as well as comfort and creating an attractive location are considered worthwhile goals. There is a limit to the fares that people are prepared to pay before they walk away, and furthermore the system is inherently inefficient as infrastructure is used to capacity only for a few hours a day and has massive excess capacity the rest of the time. Transit systems can thus only be made to work if the external benefits are somehow factored in. Many of these external factors are rather wishy washy and difficult to measure in any precise way.Certainly it would be great if the transit fleets can be used for a wider customer base than mostly commuters, but I wonder if that would generate enough revenue to keep the systems in business?
Indeed. This is true of almost all transportation infrastructure, even including airports and seaports too. The determination of value has to be carried out in terms of aggregates rather than just occupancy I think.When we criticize this, we often forget or ignore that the same is largely true of roads.
When I was a kid, my father explained to me how Portland Traction could lose money when they were carrying standees in the peak hour. (He also explained how the holding company could pay dividends, but that's a different story.) I then spent over 40 years in service planning explaining it to otherwise quite bright people. Whenever or wherever a budget crunch occurred, someone would suggest cutting night or weekend or midday service. And if they did it without considering what effects it would have, the predicted savings would not occur.Indeed. This is true of almost all transportation infrastructure, even including airports and seaports too. The determination of value has to be carried out in terms of aggregates rather than just occupancy I think.
On another matter, Miami Tri-Rail apparently has now reclaimed its entire pre-COVID ridership.
Enter your email address to join: