5 ms·

"A street is the living room of the community." http://www.andrewalexanderprice.com/blog20161027.php http://www.andrewalexanderprice.com/blog20161027.php

taurath 10y ago
Nowhere is this more apparent than Amsterdam. Too much of America is built solely for cars. Thankfully millenials want walkable areas and streets first and foremost.
- mzw_mzw 10y ago
  Really, the nerve of us crazy Americans, wanting to be able to live and work in different places depending on what we felt was best for our families. What were we thinking?
  - paganel 10y ago
    Good for those Americans. But then they shouldn't complain about being stuck in traffic 2 or 3 hours per day.
    - notmything 10y ago
      Yes they should - high density housing and everyone having to commute to the same few square miles in the middle of a densely populated area is one of the biggest scams of our time.
      - paganel 10y ago
        To each his/her own. I live in one of those "high density housing" places you mention and I have to say it's quite convenient to only be 3 tram stations away from work. It's actually faster to get to work using public transportation compared to taking the car (cause of difficulty finding parking). And half of the times I choose to walk to work anyway, it's a very effective way of relieving anxiety stress before the work day starts and of decompressing on the way home at the end of the day.
        deleted 10y ago
        [deleted]
        notmything 10y ago
        I live in one too - if we spread people out a bit more into localised communities and make work from home culture a real thing, all the pollution and lifestyle issues you get from high density housing and everyone having to work in the same few square miles would no longer be a problem. I see one car accident on the sydney harbour bridge delay thousands of parents from getting home before their children's bed times - it's just not the right way to live, no wonder everyone is depressed and family units are struggling. I live in high density housing - it's like being a caged hen compared to the freedom I had being brought up as a child in the countryside. The noise, the pollution, the high house prices. Not good.
      - boondaburrah 10y ago
        Biggest scam? That sounds like heaven to me. I, however, would willingly live in the middle of Tokyo. (Perhaps we can alleviate the problem by having a better rapid transit system?)
      - taurath 10y ago
        The alternative is low density housing and everyone having to commute to the same few square miles in the middle of nowhere with no services culture or energy..
        notmything 10y ago
        Nope - alternative is to have a work from home culture and local community culture.
  - spraak 10y ago
    But that is crazy. If you look deeper, why would you want to work separately from where you live? Like, "wanting what's best for [your] families" /could/ be that you don't need a long commute, AND where you live is nice :) It's shallow thinking that the only way to have a safe living environment is to separate it from where you work.
    - closeparen 10y ago
      >why would you want to work separately from where you live? Because separately, $300,000 is a beautiful 3bd/2ba house with a finished basement and a backyard in a safe, pleasant neighborhood with excellent services and infrastructure. Together, it is maybe a "junior 1-bedroom" condo in a former industrial area just starting its gentrification curve where you really shouldn't let the 12-year-old walk the dog alone at night. >It's shallow thinking It's economics. High density apartments offer less space at higher cost.
      - tbihl 10y ago
        The problem with this conversation (European 'let's walk everywhere' vs. American 'don't tell me how to live') is that it tends to rely on wrong assumptions from both sides, though obviously I can't read the minds of parent and GP. In the US we aggressively subsidize low-density living through school busing, infrastructure, the secondary market for federally insured single family home mortgages, and many other programs. So Europeans have a hard time recognizing that telling us to live in walkable places is like telling us to spit into the wind in so many parts of the country (after all, if a commute is bad for family, how about moving hundreds of miles from relatives?) Meanwhile, we Americans have a hard time recognizing that we're making choices on a severely biased playing field that discourages the living patterns that humans have used since the dawn of civilization. We'll get back to the old way eventually, but it's going to hurt bad for a lot of people.
        closeparen 10y ago
        "The old way" is subsistence agriculture. If we're really going back there, we'll be too busy wrestling with questions like "will the harvest be enough to feed me this year?" and "will my child die of this treatable infection?" and "what are cars?" to worry about parking :). >it's going to hurt bad for a lot of people. Well yes, anything that ends the economic conditions which make current residential arrangements appropriate will have significant consequences.

taurath 10y ago

Nowhere is this more apparent than Amsterdam. Too much of America is built solely for cars. Thankfully millenials want walkable areas and streets first and foremost.

mzw_mzw 10y ago
Really, the nerve of us crazy Americans, wanting to be able to live and work in different places depending on what we felt was best for our families. What were we thinking?
- paganel 10y ago
  Good for those Americans. But then they shouldn't complain about being stuck in traffic 2 or 3 hours per day.
  - notmything 10y ago
    Yes they should - high density housing and everyone having to commute to the same few square miles in the middle of a densely populated area is one of the biggest scams of our time.
    - paganel 10y ago
      To each his/her own. I live in one of those "high density housing" places you mention and I have to say it's quite convenient to only be 3 tram stations away from work. It's actually faster to get to work using public transportation compared to taking the car (cause of difficulty finding parking). And half of the times I choose to walk to work anyway, it's a very effective way of relieving anxiety stress before the work day starts and of decompressing on the way home at the end of the day.
      - deleted 10y ago
        [deleted]
      - notmything 10y ago
        I live in one too - if we spread people out a bit more into localised communities and make work from home culture a real thing, all the pollution and lifestyle issues you get from high density housing and everyone having to work in the same few square miles would no longer be a problem. I see one car accident on the sydney harbour bridge delay thousands of parents from getting home before their children's bed times - it's just not the right way to live, no wonder everyone is depressed and family units are struggling. I live in high density housing - it's like being a caged hen compared to the freedom I had being brought up as a child in the countryside. The noise, the pollution, the high house prices. Not good.
    - boondaburrah 10y ago
      Biggest scam? That sounds like heaven to me. I, however, would willingly live in the middle of Tokyo. (Perhaps we can alleviate the problem by having a better rapid transit system?)
    - taurath 10y ago
      The alternative is low density housing and everyone having to commute to the same few square miles in the middle of nowhere with no services culture or energy..
      - notmything 10y ago
        Nope - alternative is to have a work from home culture and local community culture.
- spraak 10y ago
  But that is crazy. If you look deeper, why would you want to work separately from where you live? Like, "wanting what's best for [your] families" /could/ be that you don't need a long commute, AND where you live is nice :) It's shallow thinking that the only way to have a safe living environment is to separate it from where you work.
  - closeparen 10y ago
    >why would you want to work separately from where you live? Because separately, $300,000 is a beautiful 3bd/2ba house with a finished basement and a backyard in a safe, pleasant neighborhood with excellent services and infrastructure. Together, it is maybe a "junior 1-bedroom" condo in a former industrial area just starting its gentrification curve where you really shouldn't let the 12-year-old walk the dog alone at night. >It's shallow thinking It's economics. High density apartments offer less space at higher cost.
    - tbihl 10y ago
      The problem with this conversation (European 'let's walk everywhere' vs. American 'don't tell me how to live') is that it tends to rely on wrong assumptions from both sides, though obviously I can't read the minds of parent and GP. In the US we aggressively subsidize low-density living through school busing, infrastructure, the secondary market for federally insured single family home mortgages, and many other programs. So Europeans have a hard time recognizing that telling us to live in walkable places is like telling us to spit into the wind in so many parts of the country (after all, if a commute is bad for family, how about moving hundreds of miles from relatives?) Meanwhile, we Americans have a hard time recognizing that we're making choices on a severely biased playing field that discourages the living patterns that humans have used since the dawn of civilization. We'll get back to the old way eventually, but it's going to hurt bad for a lot of people.
      - closeparen 10y ago
        "The old way" is subsistence agriculture. If we're really going back there, we'll be too busy wrestling with questions like "will the harvest be enough to feed me this year?" and "will my child die of this treatable infection?" and "what are cars?" to worry about parking :). >it's going to hurt bad for a lot of people. Well yes, anything that ends the economic conditions which make current residential arrangements appropriate will have significant consequences.