Looks like a cheap Rothko.

I think I have almost never used one, but I knew somebody who commuted to school across the lake.

Oh no, this tots lines up with other junk that ladies are super picky until they hit 29.

Fair enough.

No, Poles just like classic cars

Germany is German-Ly efficient

Yes, it’s common in French speaking countries, unfortunately I cannot speak on other languages .

Yes, Germans do that afaik

swiss lowlands 10'062,05 km²

Inhabitants/km²: 380

Which region of Germany should I use so it can be comparable?

What Template you use for this? I Had an interesting process aswell

Proving what I've realised in practice last week: Zeeland is by far the lest connected province in the Netherlands especially Zeews Vlaanderen.

Fathers are up in the 40s, I bet

This. Spain is much bigger, which pushes up cost of construction and more importantly, maintenance.

Are they using a comma as the decimal point?

What's going on in Galicia that it's the only place in Spain with a network?

[removed]

I love that this captures local/state housing costs. That makes much more sense than leaving it out of context.

When extremely rich states like California have the highest poverty rates, it seems to highlight the failure of the real estate housing market in proving economically appropriate shelter for sizeable portions of the population. I would argue that non market housing is an appropriate remedy.

Boebert would be shocked: "your 30's is when you become grandparents!". Anyways...

I was checking some complementary data about marriages and it seems like the age is about the same as the 1st child which sounds logical.

I wonder if that means longer marriage. I'd expect that because it's supposed to be a more matured decision and people tend to change less after a while. You know yourself better in your 30's than in your 20's...

I'd much rather do that than drive back there five times to have the same conversation.

This measure captures housing costs. They have gone up just about everywhere, but several highly populated areas in California are amongst the most expensive in the country. They also have very high gdp, of course.

So if it’s California’s (or anyone’s) “fault”, it’s because they didn’t build enough non-market housing. Which I would agree with.

Several interviews in a day is very different from several rounds of interviews on separate days. I was assuming OP meant the latter.

At a certain point you're just wasting everyone's time.

Who knew Galicia had such a robust public transportation network.

The problem is that the Belgian network is not viable either. They have way too many stops and routes that you are essentially wasting tons of money on plenty of routes barely anyone uses. The better model in that regard is the Dutch model, just with more help from the government to increase coverage. The Belgian model offers a lot of transit at a low-quality. It doesn't get people from the bicycle or car into transit. And in regard to bicycles, IMHO you don't want to get people from bicycles either, only cars. Bicycles are allowed to steal away as many transit and car users as it'd like.

Dutch transit can achieve that at a limited scale though, but is limited to fewer corridors. The future of a well working transit system lies in how The Netherlands planned it, but with more coverage. Having a service twice a day at a village of 500 is not doing anything really, except make politicians happy that they had x% covered by transit within walking distance. I much rather have the village of 2000 getting a bus service every 15 to 30 minutes.

The Dutch are on the right path IMO. They are just not provided the tools to implement it fully. But I rather see them on the right path but with limited access, than IMO the wrong path.

Yes, a point could be made that The Netherlands has gone too far in that process. Part of that is also due to financial difficulty caused by labour shortages, the pandemic, and now also the permanent effects of the pandemic (working from home). So mass transit has basically been set-back for 4 years, which is a big financial blow to any company. That means fewer lines were financially viable due to more limited staffing and budget, and more importantly less transit use.

So cuts have indeed been made. It has become a tool to budget transit rather than to improve the quality of transit. However, if you need to budget transit, IMHO the way they are doing it is still the best way. So focusing more on the corridors are viable, and focus on improving those as much as possible to offer high-quality transit there and trying to be as competitive with the bike and care on that corridor as possible.

Dutch transit companies are indeed very harsh on scrapping service. If the numbers don't meet their criteria, it is usually gone. Also see it in the big cities. But there the impact of such a change is more limited. Then it is more like a 2-minute walk going to a 5-minute walk for example. Instead of some service to no service in rural areas.

[removed]