"The ability to build a good transit system *does* predict GDP growth... "
is a *consequence* of previous GDP growth from smaller, mostly privately funded endeavors, rather than the impetus for growth that would not have happened barring the transit system? It would therefore be an artifact of increased GDP.
"The ability to build a good transit system *does* predict GDP growth... "
is a *consequence* of previous GDP growth from smaller, mostly privately funded endeavors, rather than the impetus for growth that would not have happened barring the transit system? It would therefore be an artifact of increased GDP.
So in this instance, the transit system is funded by earlier GDP and it *enhances* rather than initiates, further GDP growth.
Else, all one would need to do to initiate a growth in local GDP in Detroit, e.g., would be to build a new transit system.
We don't want to go and get cause and effect reversed.
What if...
"The ability to build a good transit system *does* predict GDP growth... "
is a *consequence* of previous GDP growth from smaller, mostly privately funded endeavors, rather than the impetus for growth that would not have happened barring the transit system? It would therefore be an artifact of increased GDP.
So in this instance, the transit system is funded by earlier GDP and it *enhances* rather than initiates, further GDP growth.
Else, all one would need to do to initiate a growth in local GDP in Detroit, e.g., would be to build a new transit system.
We don't want to go and get cause and effect reversed.