Atlanta - Emory University

[joey]

Originally Posted by MarketsWork

My point has nothing to do with the amount of any subsidy, but with Newnan_Eric's insinuation that businesses should discontinue parking subsidies as a means to encourage their employees' use of public transit. Such attempted social engineering by a private business would be pointless and self-defeating unless attractive alternatives exist for its targeted employees. For the majority of those scarce workers, it does not.

I don't know if I agree. Certainly no one's (yet) (here) suggested that the subsidies should be illegal or formally blocked by the hand of a bureaucrat, but if a company, of its own volition (or under lobbying pressure from citizen groups) decides it wants to "socially engineer" its workforce by means of eliminating a parking subsidy, it would by no means be entirely novel. Large companies with big brands set up policies all the time for the PR/good-feeling benefit of "helping the community" -- consider donations to the Arts by Home Depot, or BellSouth's relocating their offices to the urban spine and building decks at perimeter MARTA stations, etc.

This also ignores the possibility that a business may have a vested interest in reducing its employees' reliance on cars for bona fide traffic/pollution reasons that directly impact the company. However, I agree that a direct impact of any substantial size would be rare except in the cases where companies have large corporate properties on the order of college campuses.

Anyway, I'll drop it here to get back to any Emory discussion that may take place.

[mpspqr]

Originally Posted by Tombstoner

It's going up to $625 next year.

...you'll have to repeat that, I couldn't quite hear you over the sounds of me puking. It sounded like you said $625, because that's what I paid in tuition per semester back in Hawaii.

[Tombstoner]

Originally Posted by MarketsWork

My point has nothing to do with the amount of any subsidy, but with Newnan_Eric's insinuation that businesses should discontinue parking subsidies as a means to encourage their employees' use of public transit. Such attempted social engineering by a private business would be pointless and self-defeating unless attractive alternatives exist for its targeted employees. For the majority of those scarce workers, it does not.

Odd...I would have thought one could say that subsidies are, by definition, calculated interference with the market economy and therefore an effort at economic (and thus social) engineering...

PS. mpspqr: you must be a young'un: I paid $500 a year at the University of Arizona (walking 5 miles uphill in the snow both ways, sodas were a nickle... )!

[Andrea]

Originally Posted by mpspqr

...you'll have to repeat that, I couldn't quite hear you over the sounds of me puking. It sounded like you said $625, because that's what I paid in tuition per semester back in Hawaii.

Heh. Here's a real old coot chiming in -- when I went to college, tuition for the entire year was about $600.

[MarketsWork]

Originally Posted by Tombstoner

Odd...I would have thought one could say that subsidies are, by definition, calculated interference with the market economy and therefore an effort at economic (and thus social) engineering...

Quite the opposite, employer-paid subsidies are simply part of the pay package for hard-to-get/keep employees -- they are part of the market economy. Some employers provide free parking in their own facilities, some pay part of the parking fees directly to parking vendors, and some reimburse parking costs through parking allowances. All three are tax-free benefits, and are paid in response to competitive pressures to hire and retain employees. As long as we have full employment, the burden will be upon employers to compete for picky employees.

[Newnan_Eric]

I know this continues to be off the topic of Emory, but my point is that I think that employers (both public and private sector, but especially public sector) should do more to encourage transit use. This includes:

1. At least giving the option to take a monthly MARTA pass in lieu of a parking subsidy. (Many in-town companies do this.)

2. Locating near MARTA rail stations.

3. The city should find ways of incentivizing businesses to relocate to areas in close proximity to tranist stops.

There was a roundtable discussion in the previous weeks ABC. The real estate professionals stated that there is a real push from larger companies to look at in town locations rather that suburban centers now because traffic is getting so bad (or the perception is getting there). In particular firms with a lot of international visitors want to be near transit stops so there visitors don't have to deal with renting a car and trying to learn how to navigate in Atlanta.

Here is the link: Roundtable: Commercial Real Estate

[MarketsWork]

Well stated, Newnan Eric. I agree with all of those points.

And back on topic, the Emory campus is drop-dead gorgeous. Everyone who appreciates its beauty (not to mention its academic excellence) should raise a 6.5 ounce bottle of Coca-Cola and toast the memory of Robert W. Woodruff. Atlanta's greatest patron and his blessed sugar water built much of what we now enjoy -- and laid the groundwork for a lot of the rest. And most of it was done anonymously.

[Tombstoner]

Originally Posted by MarketsWork

Quite the opposite, employer-paid subsidies are simply part of the pay package for hard-to-get/keep employees -- they are part of the market economy. Some employers provide free parking in their own facilities, some pay part of the parking fees directly to parking vendors, and some reimburse parking costs through parking allowances. All three are tax-free benefits, and are paid in response to competitive pressures to hire and retain employees. As long as we have full employment, the burden will be upon employers to compete for picky employees.

Point taken.