4 ms·

I've lived in cities - they typically failed to provide better services than lower density suburbs, despite having a bigger tax base and "efficiencies". There

by eric_b 9y ago

I've lived in cities - they typically failed to provide better services than lower density suburbs, despite having a bigger tax base and "efficiencies". There are many reasons for this, but cities do not become magically more efficient or well run with more people. Sadly, the opposite is usually true. I think you've bought a bill of goods that a certain group of people are selling, without actually having lived it.

aianus 9y ago
> I've lived in cities - they typically failed to provide better services than lower density suburbs I think this is an almost uniquely American phenomenon. In most places in the world, the suburbs are where you grudgingly live when you can't afford housing in the city.
bllguo 9y ago
I live in a city as well. I thought we were comparing cities to rural areas, not suburbs? My belief would be that suburbs are not good for society - they're land inefficient and get more resources than they should because more affluent people live in them. Anyway I was just offering a basic justification for why society would focus on improving lives in cities as opposed to rural areas.
erikb 9y ago
I'd also say that wealthier people want to live in suburbs, because there they can have a whole house for themselves while also maintaining some closeness to the city center. Only poor people or not-yet-settled foreigners really live inside the city even though their costs might even be higher than paying off a house in the suburbs. And now if you're a service provider where would you focus your services? On the monoculture with money in the suburbs or on the poor and very differentiated city dwellers? The other way around the city centers are also better for startups because you haven't got the infrastructure to provide for a large, high-demand customer base yet, and prefer a niche. Multicultural hot pots are better sources of small niches with low requirements.

by eric_b 9y ago

aianus 9y ago

> I've lived in cities - they typically failed to provide better services than lower density suburbs I think this is an almost uniquely American phenomenon. In most places in the world, the suburbs are where you grudgingly live when you can't afford housing in the city.

bllguo 9y ago

I live in a city as well. I thought we were comparing cities to rural areas, not suburbs? My belief would be that suburbs are not good for society - they're land inefficient and get more resources than they should because more affluent people live in them. Anyway I was just offering a basic justification for why society would focus on improving lives in cities as opposed to rural areas.

erikb 9y ago

I'd also say that wealthier people want to live in suburbs, because there they can have a whole house for themselves while also maintaining some closeness to the city center. Only poor people or not-yet-settled foreigners really live inside the city even though their costs might even be higher than paying off a house in the suburbs. And now if you're a service provider where would you focus your services? On the monoculture with money in the suburbs or on the poor and very differentiated city dwellers? The other way around the city centers are also better for startups because you haven't got the infrastructure to provide for a large, high-demand customer base yet, and prefer a niche. Multicultural hot pots are better sources of small niches with low requirements.