The total number of American workers who usually commute by transit declined from 7.649 million in 2016 to 7.637 million in 2017. This continues a downward trend from 2015, when there were 7.761 million transit commuters. Meanwhile, the number of people who drove alone to work grew by nearly 2 million, from 114.77 million in 2016 to 116.74 million in 2017.
These figures are from table B08301 of the 2017 American Community Survey, which the Census Bureau posted on line yesterday. The table also reveals that the number of people who carpool grew from 13.58 million to 13.60 million, while the number who take taxis (which probably includes ride hailing) grew from 226,687 to 303,441. The number of people who walked and bicycled to work both declined.
Transit commuting has fallen so low that more people work at home now than take transit to work. Work-at-homes reported for 2017 total to 7.99 million, up from 7.59 million in 2016.
To help you look up commute numbers in your region, the Antiplanner has posted a file showing commute data for every state, about 390 counties, 259 major cities, and 220 urbanized areas. The Census Bureau didn’t report data for smaller counties, cities, and urban areas because it deemed the results to be less statistically reliable. However, with a total sample size of about 3.5 million, the numbers for the nation and larger regions should be reasonably accurate.
These patients had been given streptomycin to get cheap cialis rid of tuberculosis. This assurance has enabled millions of ED sufferers to take a sigh of relief http://downtownsault.org/downtown/ levitra 20 mg while treating their erection problem. Men achieve harder, longer and thicker erection getting prescription for viagra for satisfactory sexual performance). The Solution For viagra online uk preventing Erectile Dysfunction, men should adhere to the recommended dosage which is one 100mg tablet as needed, in a 24-hour period.
The file includes the raw numbers plus calculations showing the percentage of commuters (leaving out people who work at home) who drive alone, carpooled, took transit, (with rail and bus transit broken out separately), bicycled, and walked to work. A separate column shows the percentage of the total who worked at home. The last column estimates the number of cars used for commuting including drive alones and carpoolers.
For comparison, you can download similar files for 2016, 2015, 2014, 2010, 2007and 2006. The formats of these files may differ slightly as I’ve posted them at various times in the past.
Next week, I’ll take a look at and post some other census tables, including auto ownership rates, commuting by income, average commute times, homeownership, and home prices. In the meantime, I hope you find the above tables useful.
All the more reasons for transit agencies to kick the train habit and invest in distributive transit rather than monolithic collectivist transit.
LazyReader wrote:
All the more reasons for transit agencies to kick the train habit and invest in distributive transit rather than monolithic collectivist transit.
Clearly all the more reason for most of the United States to end the fixation with rail (exceptions for a fairly few parts of the United States, starting with New York City and nearby counties) and implement pricing of freeway-class roads (with transit lines operating on those roads where there is demand for transit service).
If politicians really want to continue to build rail lines in the (usually unreasonable) hope that users of the transportation system to park their cars and take rail transit instead, then an enormous (and probably unacceptable) increase in motor fuel taxes is needed first.
Remember that federal motor fuel taxes have not gone up since 1994.
“If politicians really want to continue to build rail lines …, then an enormous (and probably unacceptable) increase in motor fuel taxes is needed first.”
Why is it always assumed that drivers should pay more to drive so that transit passengers can pay less to ride? If transit passengers can’t or won’t pay for the cost to provide transit, then transit costs too much and isn’t worth public investment.
“Why is it always assumed that drivers should pay more to drive so that transit passengers can pay less to ride? If transit passengers can’t or won’t pay for the cost to provide transit, then transit costs too much and isn’t worth public investment.”
Roads are mostly paid for by property taxes and not expected to be profitable to survive. Also the real price of driving is $2+ per mile
“Roads are mostly paid for by property taxes and not expected to be profitable to survive.“
If there wasn’t a road connecting every property to every other property, there would have to be…what?…train tracks? Roads serve all trips, regardless of origin, destination, distance, purpose, time if day, day of week, etc., etc. There has to be at least one way for everybody to get to and from everywhere they need to go. Roads are the most efficient way to do that. Period. With a well functioning system of roads in place, there is no need to have an expensive, inefficient, redundant other system, especially when targeted customers of that system continue to reject it wholeheartedly.
Thus, not only does it make sense for us…all of us…to pool resources and pay for the development and upkeep of roads, it is essential that we do so. To suggest roads should not be paid for because they are not profitable makes no sense. Profit is not a measure. Instead, think about the public benefit of roads vis-a-vis the public cost for roads.
Besides, highwayman, where I come from, new roads are “mostly paid for” by developers and costs are passed on to home buyers. And existing roads are “mostly paid for” by property taxes ON THE VEHICLES THAT USE THEM. Transit costs, on the other hand, are “mostly paid for” by people who have no use for transit.
Since you’re driving, you’re not using sidewalks, yet for some reason you’re not complaining about those not being profitable? Why is a 5 foot wide stretch of concrete ok, but 2 stretches of steel about the same distance apart bad? :$
“…for some reason you’re not complaining about those not being profitable? Why is a 5 foot wide stretch of concrete ok, but 2 stretches of steel about the same distance apart bad?“
Where to begin?! I’m giving clues to the clueless.
Look, I never said anything about sidewalks or roads or transit, for that matter, having to be profitable. That’s your thing, evidently.
Public works…i. e., projects paid for with public money…should yield public benefits that are at least somewhat close to the public costs if the project. When public funds are used to build roads for people to drive on with their own cars or trucks or bikes or whatever, taxpayer win. Sidewalks allow people without cars to go places. So they have lasting benefits. Public funds do not pay for drivers to operate their cars and public funds do not buy shoes for pedestrians.
In places where roads are built without sidewalks, liberals whine about “You have to have a car to get around in this town. The deck is stacked for rich people, etc.”
Trainsit, on the other hand is all about paying for operation. Drivers, ticket takers, maintenace workers, etc., are all paid to operate buses and trains and the benefits are both small and falling and they don’t accrue to the public at large.
If it was just the 2 stretches of steel, and if they generated any benefits FOR THE PUBLIC AT LARGE, there would be fewer opponents. But, as it is, it’s public money spent without public benefit.
Yet that’s the problem with you SJW’s/teahadi’s. You want to break things, then complain that they don’t work :$
I can explain it to you, but I can’t understand it for you.
It’s not that you don’t understand, it’s that you just don’t care :$
Don’t bother with the highwayman; he’s an idiot with some sort of mental defect. All his posts are copy & paste gibberish. You’re wasting your time.
Well given that you guys are crooks, I’ll take that as a compliment! :$