Agreed. To quote myself for the third time, As for these reasons, give it another 10 years, and I'd say a significant number of people (if not the majority) would have no idea a Metro government existed. And as for pseudo-Europeanism, why don't we call it pseudo-Asianism because Tokyo, Seoul...

I mean, goodness gracious, of course "metro" is short for metropolitan - it is where the short form came from! Whether it was a direct adoption of the term or a sort-of rederivation (as is the case for DC, but which explicitly chose the "metro" moniker for its worldwide reference to rapid...

Except, of course, the DC Metro, the LA Metro, the SF Muni Metro, the Tyne-and-Wear Metro, the Tokyo Metro, the Seoul Metro, the Shanghai Metro, the Madrid Metro, the Rome Metro, the Moscow Metro, the Amsterdam Metro, and the "metro" used in almost every language in almost every country with...

Metro, in this context, specifically means "metropolitan railway", from the name of the Parisian system which was the first to use it to describe an underground rapid transit (which was in turn a direct translation of the name of London's initial systems, but this abbreviation never took hold in...

At the end of the day, the terminology is all arbitrary and based on convention. While definitions aren't necessarily democratic, there is an overwhelmingly larger convention/practice of calling these "urban light rails with partial at-grade and partial grade-separated sections" as...

Better tell Boston to change all their documents, dating since the 19th century, that have been calling it a subway. And don't forget to notify all the stadtbahn-type German U-bahn systems to change their names. By the way, the branch of the Green line that's grade-separated is D, not E.

And of course, it's not just those three streets I showed that are lowrise, there are also entire swaths of lowrise neighbourhoods in downtown Manhattan and Chicago (and at similar distances from their FDs; just look in other directions). Many of them are also "grimy" and "run down", but as have...

1) Chicago and NYC had at least half a century of head start over TO in "going tall", so even if your claim were true, it is both hardly surprising nor a meaningful comparison. 2) The row of lowrise along that stretch of Yonge is 2 km from the centre of financial district (say, Bay@King). 2...

The difficulty with defining the boundaries of "downtown Toronto" would not be dissimilar to the difficulty of defining that of downtown/lower Manhattan. At the end, it's all arbitrary.

Yes I get what you mean now. Wide avenues with street canyons - definitely less common in TO than in NYC, but lower University, Bay and to some extent Bloor would fit that category (Wall St is a narrow alley, and we are certainly not short of narrow alleys lined by highrises). But my point...

Which "grand avenues" in NYC are you talking about? Because most of the grand avenues, the ones running through Midtown, are lined by highrises and skyscrapers, much like our own grand avenue (University). Whereas the main streets that are lined by lowrises (such as those in lower Manhattan...

The prime downtown streets in many of the greatest cities of the world are lined by lowrises. Rotman expansion.

Or maybe we should be like London, HK, Tokyo etc and continue to use named lines. My vote would be for Eglinton Line. I would be against introducing new terminology ("metro") at this point.

According to G&M, the request is for more than $350M (the difference coming from including the 50% subsidy for TTC operating costs), and has been rejected by McGuinty.

Like everyone said, this really is just amazing!

Or perhaps because, as a practising scientist, I actually know what the scientific process is like and actually understand the experiments, studies and data presented in the papers? And am having a lot of fun seeing someone trying to rattle off a whole bunch of scientific terminology and...

I am indeed mistaken about the $150B figure, after having read the original paper. But the $215B figure for obesity also includes indirect cost of lost productivity. And there's no doubt that the obesity cost will soon greatly surpass that of smoking: in the last decade the obesity cost doubled...

Since data from Canada are harder to come by, let's look at the US. According to the CDC, smoking cost $200 billion annually ($190 from firsthand, $10 billion from secondhand), while obesity cost between $150 to $215 billion. Tobacco tax (federal plus state) adds up to around $20 billion per...

Not only has tobacco been experimentally shown to cause cancer, its role as a risk factor is both as strong and as well demonstrated as (and in many cases / for certain diseases, stronger and better demonstrated than) obesity's role as a risk factor (yes, obesity, like smoking, is also a "risk"...

^ I would hope that, by the 21st century, most people realize there's more to sewage than just the odour. On the other hand, what if our reactions to vistas could be more-or-less precisely quantitated or correlated with certain "desirable" brain states? Do vistas then become an objective issue...