Cox Crow

Economics, and Transportation, and Planning, Oh My!

Steven E. Polzin, Ph.D., writes in a PLANetizen op-ed that the planning profession has not noticed economics.

The existing literature, including literature on the cost of sprawl, is focused on the land use traits of density, mix of uses, contiguousness, and urban design. An analysis of the implications on travel of evolving economic phenomenon and business models is under-represented.

The "economic phenomenon" mentioned is the rise of big box stores as the most efficient retail model. Would they be the most efficient if the public were not absorbing indirect transportation and parking costs? One of Wal-Mart's innovations was the redesign of the loading docks in their distribution centers: improved logistics reduced costs. Their ability to profit does not entirely result from their bargaining leverage. I suspect there are similiar innovations possible with small stores.

He raises the point that the larger stores have longer hours and large selections as well as lower prices. The former do not necessarily follow from the size of the retail establishment. Wendy's keeps the drive-thru open until 01:00. If they want to sell anything, retail establishments should be open when their customers are available to buy. In a typical suburb, the residents are miles away from local retail during the day, and only have opportunity to shop after 19:00. It thus makes sense to extend the hours past 17:00, and to open on the Sabbath. And while the big box can hold more inventory, Mrs. Green's and PayLess have wider selections of certain goods.

The big box is economically viable because we must drive everywhere. Once we're leave the car, we like to walk, and will avoid returning to the confines of our vehicle. But, yes, it behooves one to consider economics.

4:50:47 PM # Google It!
categories: Place

A Visual Inventory

Matthew McClintock is compiling a visual inventory of his house. I browsed through his shelves a bit.

3:58:01 PM # Google It!

On Busing

NPR begins a series today on the legacy of school busing. Busing, for those who missed the last half-century, is the process of moving students from one school to another, based on the racial composition of the school. Since public schools are funded through property taxes, schools in wealthier neighborhoods tend to do better than schools in poor neighborhoods. Students from wealthier families also tend to have less external complications, such as having to work for a living, that might prevent study. Statistically speaking, persons with less melanin tend to be wealthier than persons with more melanin.

What's the goal of busing? Is it to improve the opportunity of children to learn? Or is it to encourage contact between people who might not otherwise encounter each other outside of well-defined social roles?

The former goal could have been more easily addressed by reallocating the income from property taxes. Though, as we have seen in some districts, money going in to a school does not guarantee results coming out — depending on what your expected result is. But the money does not need to go to the school, so much as it does to the children, in order to remove some of the factors that inhibit learning.

That would not address issues of social contact though. Without familiarity on their own terms, children will inherit their prejudices, seeing people as a class, not as individuals.

9:27:41 AM # Google It!

Enemy Combatants

The obfuscation makes this situation complex. It's not at all complex when accurate terms are used. For some reason, the current administration has an aversion to accuracy.

An enemy combatant is a soldier. Someone fighting against their country is a traitor. A citizen has certain rights and privileges. There are procedures for this. First, there's a trial. Then, you hang him.

Seems pretty straightforward to me. You obfuscate when you have something to hide, or when you don't have the ground to stand on.

8:36:30 AM # Google It!
categories: Law, Politics