I’d love to know how they came to THIS conclusion:
Believe it: D.C.’s Metro system ranked best in the country https://t.co/BFP63GPmVn
— Washington Examiner (@dcexaminer) February 24, 2016
Actually, I can guess: lies, damned lies, and statistics. I imagine that a good analysis of the criteria they used to determine best mass transit system would prove interesting. Or at least informative.
Ah, looking at the metrics they used, what they’re really measuring is ‘which cities are the absolute worst for car commuters’. Because the criteria are all about how much relatively better the transit system is than for those who drive.
D.C.’s Metro system is excellently designed for moving about beneath the bombed out ruins of our nation’s capital 200 years following nuclear war, enabling access to sections of the city blocked off by seemingly easy to scale collapsed buildings. They also have a space-time warping property that gets activated in such situations, making moving between areas much easier.
Stations may be inhabited by raiders, super mutants, shambling, mindless husks that were once human and giant cockroaches in such situations, however, so be aware.
Point taken.
According to http://dcist.com/2016/02/metro_no_1.php, the metrics used were:
1. average commute time for transit users
2. percentage difference between average commute times of car commuters and transit users
3. percentage of commuters who use public transit
4. total number of commuters who use public transit
5. the difference between the citywide median income and the median income of transit users.
3, 4, and 5 are all likely strongly influenced by the subsidy for government workers. As Skip noted, 2 and 3 (and maybe 4) are strongly influenced by the congestion for car commuters.