the past, it is important
Jul. 20th, 2009 12:34 pmLocation 1829-35: "The only reason Manhattan works, the only reason this place can be functional, is because of the mass transit infrastructure that so brilliantly underpins the whole island."
Yes, the mass transit, it is lovely. And it has been there a while. But not that long. Currently, Manhattan's population (as an island) is around 1.6 million. That's a lot of people in not very much space. But I read Luc Sante's entertaining _Low Life_. I know a lot of people have been in Manhattan for a long time. So many people, in fact, that it is actually kind of difficult to wrap one's brain around. Steiner didn't even try. If he had, he would have found this entry at wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_New_York_City#Historic_population_figures
In 1900, there were 1.8 million people (as in, _more_ than now) in the same area. I'm reasonably certain that while _some_ of the current mass transit options were in place in 1900, it was nothing like as extensive as it is now.
I suppose the counter argument would be that Manhattan in 1900 was not "functional", but I think at that point, we might be into value judgments.
Yes, the mass transit, it is lovely. And it has been there a while. But not that long. Currently, Manhattan's population (as an island) is around 1.6 million. That's a lot of people in not very much space. But I read Luc Sante's entertaining _Low Life_. I know a lot of people have been in Manhattan for a long time. So many people, in fact, that it is actually kind of difficult to wrap one's brain around. Steiner didn't even try. If he had, he would have found this entry at wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_New_York_City#Historic_population_figures
In 1900, there were 1.8 million people (as in, _more_ than now) in the same area. I'm reasonably certain that while _some_ of the current mass transit options were in place in 1900, it was nothing like as extensive as it is now.
I suppose the counter argument would be that Manhattan in 1900 was not "functional", but I think at that point, we might be into value judgments.
no subject
Date: 2009-07-20 06:29 pm (UTC)It's sort of breathtaking. Manhattan peaked at around 2.3 million in the teens. It dropped down to 1.4 million. I'm not sure what you call losing 40% of your population, but _I_ would at least call it _many_.
This guy is a tool.
Electric cars would go a long ways to reducing noise levels in Manhattan.
Ah, the foolishness of young males
Date: 2009-07-20 06:50 pm (UTC)Actually, some people can't live in 90 degree heat, and whenever there's a heat wave in Chicago, people _die_. Before AC was widespread, it was a big problem.
Interesting that he predicts people will move out of huge houses, but doesn't take into consideration that a poorly insulated small house might actually cost a lot more to heat and cool than a really well insulated much larger house. I'm _hoping_ he mentions the benefits of mooching heat from downstairs neighbors in multi-family dwellings, but I doubt it.