I	rational choice-Daniel Kahneman Vernon L. Smith -Nobel Econ in 2002

I	people do not act rationally but rather intuitively for choices

Daniel Kahneman
Princeton University, USA

“for having integrated insights from psychological research into economic science, especially concerning human judgment and decision-making under uncertainty”

and

Vernon L. Smith
George Mason University, USA

“for having established laboratory experiments as a tool in empirical economic analysis, especially in the study of alternative market mechanisms”.
Psychological and experimental economics
Traditionally, much of economic research has relied on the assumption of a “homo œconomicus” motivated by self-interest and capable of rational decision-making. Economics has also been widely considered a non-experimental science, relying on observation of real-world economies rather than controlled laboratory experiments. Nowadays, however, a growing body of research is devoted to modifying and testing basic economic assumptions; moreover, economic research relies increasingly on data collected in the lab rather than in the field. This research has its roots in two distinct, but currently converging, areas: the analysis of human judgment and decision-making by cognitive psychologists, and the empirical testing of predictions from economic theory by experimental economists. This year’s laureates are the pioneers in these two research areas.

Daniel Kahneman has integrated insights from psychology into economics, thereby laying the foundation for a new field of research. Kahneman’s main findings concern decision-making under uncertainty, where he has demonstrated how human decisions may systematically depart from those predicted by standard economic theory. Together with Amos Tversky (deceased in 1996), he has formulated prospect theory as an alternative, that better accounts for observed behavior. Kahneman has also discovered how human judgment may take heuristic shortcuts that systematically depart from basic principles of probability. His work has inspired a new generation of researchers in economics and finance to enrich economic theory using insights from cognitive psychology into intrinsic human motivation.

Vernon Smith has laid the foundation for the field of experimental economics. He has developed an array of experimental methods, setting standards for what constitutes a reliable laboratory experiment in economics. In his own experimental work, he has demonstrated the importance of alternative market institutions, e.g., how the revenue expected by a seller depends on the choice of auction method. Smith has also spearheaded “wind-tunnel tests”, where trials of new, alternative market designs – e.g., when deregulating electricity markets – are carried out in the lab before being implemented in practice. His work has been instrumental in establishing experiments as an essential tool in empirical economic analysis.
Read more about this year's prize

II	explains choice using prospect theory-- how people balance risk

Military historian John A. Lynn argues that prospect theory provides an intriguing if not completely verifiable framework of analysis for understanding Louis XIV's foreign policy nearer to the end of his reign. As he briefly explains the theory, it "argues that individuals choose actions or objects not simply by rationally weighing their intrinsic utility. The theory states this by arguing that people measure utility by some variable reference point, not by some immutable scale. . . Tests show that people place higher value on things that they already regard as their own than on comparable things that they do not possess." Applied to Louis XIV's foreign policy, it promises to explain his actions that helped lead to the Nine Years War and the War of the Spanish Succession. Lynn elaborates, asserting that "[a]ccording to prospect theory, it would be entirely reasonable for Louis to invest great effort and accept high risk in the name of defending his old territories and new acquisitions. Here extreme behavior would be the natural product of a defensive mentality and not of an acquisitive drive." (Lynn, pp. 43-44) Lynn, John A. (1999) The Wars of Louis XIV 1667-1714. United Kingdom: Pearson Education Ltd.

II	economic choice -

I	Sprawl P. 87 - dishwasher

III	public transportation

I	Sprawl Book: p 100 streetcar yielded to bus etc etc

II	Streetcar ridership

portland

II	Breugmann's take

I	US news and world report US News & World Report A Call to Rethink Sprawl By Jay Tolson 1/30/06

I	ridership on transit continues to decline, and, of course, congestion has increased because they haven't built roads to keep up.

III	Portland study shows increase in ridership

Portland's common sense approach 2003.
Frank Malone. Railway Age. Bristol: Nov 2003. Vol. 204, Iss. 11; pg. 34
Abstract (Summary)
The latest extension of the light rail MAX (Metropolitan Area eXpress) system, reaching from the Rose Quarter north to the Expo Center, will be known as the Yellow Line, or Interstate MAX. It will loop through the city center by sharing trackage of the Red (Airport MAX) and Blue (Eastside and Westside MAX) lines. Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District of Oregon expects to start Yellow Line service in May - four months sooner than scheduled and $25 million under budget. With about 80,000 weekday boardings, MAX is one of the few rail transit systems anywhere to see ridership grow in recent months, despite a sluggish local economy. Including new vehicles, the total cost of the new line is about $350 million, with $257.5 million in federal New Start money. While construction and planning proceed for MAX extensions, work continues on an .06-mile extension of the downtown Portland Streetcar service, and design proceeds on a 14.7-mile Washington County commuter rail line west of the city.

IV	APTA stats

I	CATO institute's misleading #s

cato

II	High gas prices in 2006 led to record ridership levels for many transit agencies.25But due to budget and service cuts, Portland transit ridership grew by an anemic 0.1 per- cent.26

III	26 26. American Public Transportation Association, “APTA Transit Ridership Report: Fourth Quarter 2006,” p. 25, tinyurl.com/2kgt8y. indeed .14% ytd PROBLEM -- this is YTD not Y/Y

II	first quarter 2008 up 2.08%

III	07 up 4.93%

IV	06 up 2.87% - almost 30x Cato's #s

V	05 up 6.33%

04 up 14%

VII	03 up 2.97%

VIII	02 up 7.89%

IX	01 up 8.67% - completion of light rail to the airport

00 up 8%

V	Oregon consumption of gasoline NPP

I	Gasoline Consumption (1000s Barrels) 1999 36,511.6 2000 35,989.0 -2.5% 2001 36,157.4 +1.5% 2002 36,897.9 +3.1% 2003 36,527.2 -2.1% 2004 36,817.3 +1.8%

VI	Oregon Population

I	CATO sez: Far from curbing sprawl, high housing prices led tens of thousands of families to move to Vancouver, Washington, and other cities outside the region's authority. ( CITATION NEEDED -- because the population has grown slowly.)

II	total in portland's county (NPP)

I	in Multnomah County, OR for Years 1999 to 2007 Multnomah County, OR Years Population-Annual 1999 N/A 2000 661,466.0 2001 668,490.0 +2.1% 2002 674,887.0 +1% 2003 677,562.0 +1.4% 2004 671,363.0 -1% 2005 672,906.0 +1.3% 2006 681,454 +2.3% 2007 701986 + 3 .03%

III	Population-Children in Multnomah County, OR for Years 1999 to 2007 Multnomah County, OR Years Population-Children Percent 1999 N/A 2000 22.30 % 2001 22.49 % 2002 22.46 % 2003 22.52 % 2004 22.64 % 2005 22.61 % 2006 N/A 2007 N/A

IV	Portland suburban county population

I	Washington County and Clackamas County, Washington County has commuter rail to Portland

II	Washington County population

I	Population-Annual in Washington County, OR for Years 1999 to 2007 Washington County, OR Years Population-Annual 1999 N/A 2000 448,508.0 2001 462,492.0 2002 471,962.0 2003 479,889.0 2004 487,548.0 2005 499,794.0 2006 N/A 2007 N/A

III	Clackamas County population

I	Population-Annual in Clackamas County, OR for Years 1999 to 2007 Clackamas County, OR Years Population-Annual 1999 N/A 2000 339,657.0 2001 345,347.0 2002 352,248.0 2003 357,032.0 2004 362,681.0 2005 368,470.0 2006 N/A 2007 N/A

VII	Oregon tourism sova

I	august 07 lodging occupancy Portland metro area increase of .5% November of 07, same-- November 07 year to date increase of 2% lodging occupancy,

II	tourism could account for less than half of the nearly 5% increase of 2007

III	half of people staying 3 days or more source

IV	May 07 -08 COMMUTER rail transit portland up 11.2% may 08 morning commutes 52000. 1677 people Evening commute 65,100 trips in may. 2100 people

I	src p trib

VIII	same gasoline for California

I	Oregon Demographics

I	Population-Children in Oregon for Years 1999 to 2007 Oregon Years Population-Children Percent 1999 24.95 % 2000 24.71 % 2001 24.58 % 2002 24.21 % 2003 23.94 % 2004 23.71 % 2005 23.34 % 2006 23.14 % 2007 N/A

II	Oregon Years Population-Annual 1999 3,316,154.0 2000 3,431,070.0 +4.4% 2001 3,473,484.0 +2.3% 2002 3,522,342.0 +2.4% 2003 3,562,681.0 +2.2% 2004 3,591,363.0 +1.8% 2005 3,641,056.0 +2.4% 2006 N/A 2007 N/A

I	Pasted Graphic

III	Population-Annual in Multnomah County, OR for Years 1998 to 2007 Multnomah County, OR Years Population-Annual 1998 N/A 1999 N/A 2000 661,466.0 2001 668,490.0 +2.1% 2002 674,887.0 +1% 2003 677,562.0 +1.4% 2004 671,363.0 -1.02% 2005 672,906.0 +1.3% 2006 N/A 2007 N/A

I	Pasted Graphic

IV	Population-Children in Multnomah County, OR for Years 1998 to 2007 Multnomah County, OR Years Population-Children Percent 1998 N/A 1999 N/A 2000 22.30 % 2001 22.49 % 2002 22.46 % 2003 22.52 % 2004 22.64 % 2005 22.61 % 2006 N/A 2007 N/A

I	Pasted Graphic

II	same stats for San Jose

I	2000, 33.84%

II	2 thousand one, -8.04%

III	2002, -18.18%

IV	2003 2.16%

V	2004, 13.61%

VI	2005 not listed

VII	2006, 36.56%

VIII	2007, 5.8%

IX	2008, first quarter 3.69%

III	California Years Gasoline Consumption (1000s Barrels) 1999 337,790.8 2000 342,890.3 2001 351,980.5 2002 369,566.9 2003 367,675.2 2004 376,065.4

III	Street car costs relative to buses

IV	national city Lines-1936-1950

holding company formed by General Motors, Firestone tire, standard oil of California, and Phillips Petroleum, bought out more than 100 electric streetcar systems in 45 cities. ( Detroit, New York, Oakland, Philadelphia, Phoenix, St. Louis, Salt Lake City, Tulsa, Baltimore, Minneapolis, Seattle and Los Angeles,. Those systems were ultimately dismantled and replaced with GM buses in what became known as the General Motors streetcar conspiracy.

V	Earlier interference from General Motors

The formation of National City Lines had actually been preceded by other actions by GM. The company began investing in streetcar lines in the late 1920s the shortlived United Cities Motor Transit (UCMT), a direct subsidiary of GM which lasted from 1932 until 1935 when the American Transit Association (ATA) censured the company for converting streetcar systems to bus lines.

VI	Seventh Circuit United States Court of Appeals United States v. National City Lines, 1951, Re: Pacific electric Railway

link

I	www.altlaw.org Columbia University and University of Colorado Law school

II	paragraph 2 of the ruling:

The first count of the indictment, with which, in view of the fact that defendants were acquitted thereon, we are only incidentally concerned, charged defendants with having knowingly and continuously engaged in an unlawful combination and conspiracy to secure control of a substantial number of the companies which provide public transportation service in various cities, towns and counties of the several states, and to eliminate and exclude all competition in the sale of motor busses, petroleum products, tires and tubes to such transportation companies then owned or controlled by National City Lines, Inc., or Pacific City Lines, Inc., or of which said companies should acquire control, in the future, all in violation of Section 1 of the Anti-trust Act, 15 U.S.C.A. 1.

III	paragraph 8 of the ruling:

National City Lines, organized in 1936, as a holding company to acquire and operate local transit companies, had brought, up to the time when the contracts were executed, its necessary equipment and fuel products from different suppliers, with no long-term contract with any of them. Pacific City Lines was organized for the purpose of acquiring local transit companies on the Pacific Coast and commenced doing business in January 1938. American was organized to acquire local transportation systems in the larger metropolitan areas in various parts of the country in 1943. It merged with National in 1946.

VII

IV	Density P 91 land consumption cop out

V	98 dubious notion market failiure (?)

VI	102 freeways beneficial for central cities

VII	106 blue government for population control zoning

VIII	107 red cars replace nothing? census data within

Means of Transportation to Work for the U.S.: 1990 Census
+------------------------------------+-----------------------+
| | 1990 Census |
| +-----------------------+
|Means of Transportation to Work | Number Percent |
+------------------------------------+-----------------------+
| | |
|Workers 16 years and over.......... | 115,070,274 100.0 |
| | |
| Car, truck, or van............... | 99,592,932 86.5 |
| Drove alone.................... | 84,215,298 73.2 |
| Carpooled...................... | 15,377,634 13.4 |
| Public transportation............ | 6,069,589 5.3 |
| Bus or trolley bus............. | 3,445,000 3.0 |
| Streetcar or trolley car....... | 78,130 0.1 |
| Subway or elevated............. | 1,755,476 1.5 |
| Railroad....................... | 574,052 0.5 |
| Ferryboat 1/................... | 37,497 0.0 |
| Taxicab........................ | 179,434 0.2 |
| Motorcycle....................... | 237,404 0.2 |
| Bicycle.......................... | 466,856 0.4 |
| Walked only...................... | 4,488,886 3.9 |
| Other means...................... | 808,582 0.7 |
| Worked at home................... | 3,406,025 3.0 |
+------------------------------------+-----------------------+

Means of Transportation to Work for the U.S.: 1980 Census
+------------------------------------+-----------------------+
| | 1980 Census |
| +-----------------------+
|Means of Transportation to Work | Number Percent |
+------------------------------------+-----------------------+
| | |
|Workers 16 years and over.......... | 96,617,296 100.0 |
| | |
|Car, truck, or van................. | 81,258,496 84.1 |
| Drove alone.................... | 62,193,449 64.4 |
| Carpooled...................... | 19,065,047 19.7 |
| Public transportation............ | 6,175,061 6.4 |
| Bus or trolley bus 2/.......... | 3,924,787 4.1 |
| Streetcar or trolley car 2/.... | N/A ... |
| Subway or elevated............. | 1,528,852 1.6 |
| Railroad....................... | 554,089 0.6 |
| Ferryboat 1/................... | N/A ... |
| Taxicab........................ | 167,333 0.2 |
| Motorcycle....................... | 419,007 0.4 |
| Bicycle.......................... | 468,348 0.5 |
| Walked only...................... | 5,413,248 5.6 |
| Other means...................... | 703,273 0.7 |
| Worked at home................... | 2,179,863 2.3 |
+------------------------------------+-----------------------+

Means of Transportation to Work for the U.S.: 1970 Census
+------------------------------------+-----------------------+
| | 1970 Census |
| +-----------------------+
|Means of Transportation to Work | Number Percent |
+------------------------------------+-----------------------+
| | |
|Workers 14 years and over.......... | 76,852,389 100.0 |
| | |
| Car, truck, or van............... | 59,722,550 77.7 |
| Drove alone 3/................. | N/A ... |
| Carpooled 4/................... | N/A ... |
| Public transportation............ | 6,810,458 8.9 |
| Bus or trolley bus 2/.......... | 4,244,862 5.5 |
| Streetcar or trolley car 2/.... | N/A ... |
| Subway or elevated............. | 1,767,594 2.3 |
| Railroad....................... | 501,556 0.7 |
| Ferryboat 1/................... | N/A ... |
| Taxicab........................ | 296,446 0.4 |
| Motorcycle 5/.................... | N/A ... |
| Bicycle 5/....................... | N/A ... |
| Walked only...................... | 5,689,819 7.4 |
| Other means...................... | 1,944,418 2.5 |
| Worked at home................... | 2,685,144 3.5 |
+------------------------------------+-----------------------+

Means of Transportation to Work for the U.S.: 1960 Census
+------------------------------------+-----------------------+
| | 1960 Census |
| +-----------------------+
|Means of Transportation to Work | Number Percent |
+------------------------------------+-----------------------+
| | |
|Workers 14 years and over.......... | 64,655,805 100.0 |
| | |
| Car, truck, or van 6/............ | 41,368,062 64.0 |
| Drove alone.................... | N/A ... |
| Carpooled...................... | N/A ... |
| Public transportation............ | 7,806,932 12.1 |
| Bus or trolley bus 2/.......... | 5,322,651 8.2 |
| Streetcar or trolley car 2/.... | N/A ... |
| Subway or elevated 7/.......... | 2,484,281 3.8 |
| Railroad 7/.................... | N/A ... |
| Ferryboat 1/................... | N/A ... |
| Taxicab 8/..................... | N/A ... |
| Motorcycle 5/.................... | N/A ... |
| Bicycle 5/....................... | N/A ... |
| Walked only...................... | 6,416,343 9.9 |
| Other means...................... | 1,619,842 2.5 |
| Worked at home................... | 4,662,750 7.2 |
| Not reported (1960 only)......... | 2,781,876 4.3 |
+------------------------------------+-----------------------+
N/A Not available.
... Not applicable.
1/ This category was included in "Other means" prior to 1990.
2/ This category was "Bus or streetcar" in 1980, 1970, and 1960.
3/ This category was "Private automobile, driver" in 1970.
4/ This category was "Private automobile, passenger" in 1970.
5/ This category was included in "Other means" in 1970 and 1960.
6/ This category was "Private automobile or carpool" in 1960.
7/ This category was "Railroad, subway, or elevated" in 1960.
8/ This category was included in "Other means" in 1960.

Source: 1990 Census of Population, STF3C.
1980 Census of Population, General Social and Economic
Characteristics, United States Summary.
1970 Census of Population, Characteristics of the
Population, United States Summary.
1960 Census of Population, Characteristics of the
Population, United States Summary.

Contact: Journey-to-Work and Migration Statistics Branch, Population
Division, U.S. Bureau of the Census, (301) 457-2454.

IX	108 Orange plumbing as a cause ignored

X	19 orange definition of sprawl

XI	62 city density charts

XII	different character of sprawl over the years- Baron Hausmann versus Corbusier

Chicago Sun-Times Kevin Nance
Learning to sprawl
December 27, 2005
BY KEVIN NANCE Architecture Critic

"It's an interesting history but a skewed one," says Ruth Knack, executive editor of Planning magazine, the monthly publication of the American Planning Association. "For one thing, Bob essentially equates early suburban development with the sprawl we have today, but in fact, what we have today is far different from what we had in the past in this country and in Europe. The big difference is that the early suburban development was along streetcar and then rail lines. It was a walking kind of development that didn't impinge on the countryside the way development does
today."