3 ms·
You have to think about complexity rather than just construction impact. Taking this argument leads one down a problematic 'Tragedy of the commons' path. As som
by seltzered_ 7y ago
You have to think about complexity rather than just construction impact. Taking this argument leads one down a problematic 'Tragedy of the commons' path. As someone else said, not building may just create more sprawl somewhere else and increase vehicle miles travelled. You're also ignoring some historical covenants that might have excluded race from certain neighborhoods.
References: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1102604887223750657 https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1102604887223750657 on 'tragedy of the commons'
https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1141456562512207872 https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1141456562512207872 work done on historical racial restrictive covenants.
- lonelappde 7y agoThe racial covenants (and blockbusting and redlining) need to get mentioned more to refute the bogus pseudo-nativist argument that whoever moved to town first has the right to control housing policy.