4 ms·

Calling a space a "transit desert" implies the problem is too little transit and pushes for more transit. How about overdevelopment? I'm all for public transi

by spodek 7y ago

Calling a space a "transit desert" implies the problem is too little transit and pushes for more transit. How about overdevelopment? I'm all for public transit, but building and then calling for the public to provide transit service is externalizing costs to raise property value. In an overpopulated world, we don't need more growth but de-growth, at the city, national, and global level.

melling 7y ago
You think it’s better to move out of cities, build highways and own cars? The earth likes it better when we don’t sprawl.
- lonelappde 7y ago
  As George Carlin said, The Earth is fine. The Earth ain't goin nowhere. We're all gonna die.
  - Waterluvian 7y ago
    Anytime anyone talks about saving the earth, substitute it for the idea of saving the earth's configuration that is most comfortable for us humans.
- branweb 7y ago
  It's perhaps a little ambiguous, but I understood the comment as arguing the exact opposite. I interpreted "overdevelopment" to basically mean the kind of sprawl explainted here: https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2017/1/9/the-real-reason-your-city-has-no-money https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2017/1/9/the-real-reason... ...where cities expand horizontally for short-term tax revenue gains/federal grants while accruing long-term infrastructure costs that their tax bases can't pay.
  - melling 7y ago
    “ In an overpopulated world, we don't need more growth but de-growth, at the city,...” Perhaps it is a little ambiguous. However, the story is about New York City. There’s not much room to grow outwards. More mass transit in and around the city would reduce the need to own a car.
perl4ever 7y ago
"Raising property value" is a positive externality. That's what the government exists for. If you only consider the bad effects of everything the government does and not the net, you're going to inevitably be an anarchist. Which is weird, because "externalities" started out being a way to attack private enterprise.
jellicle 7y ago
We need more growth in cities and less growth in "sprawl" areas.

by spodek 7y ago

melling 7y ago

You think it’s better to move out of cities, build highways and own cars? The earth likes it better when we don’t sprawl.

lonelappde 7y ago
As George Carlin said, The Earth is fine. The Earth ain't goin nowhere. We're all gonna die.
- Waterluvian 7y ago
  Anytime anyone talks about saving the earth, substitute it for the idea of saving the earth's configuration that is most comfortable for us humans.
branweb 7y ago
It's perhaps a little ambiguous, but I understood the comment as arguing the exact opposite. I interpreted "overdevelopment" to basically mean the kind of sprawl explainted here: https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2017/1/9/the-real-reason-your-city-has-no-money https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2017/1/9/the-real-reason... ...where cities expand horizontally for short-term tax revenue gains/federal grants while accruing long-term infrastructure costs that their tax bases can't pay.
- melling 7y ago
  “ In an overpopulated world, we don't need more growth but de-growth, at the city,...” Perhaps it is a little ambiguous. However, the story is about New York City. There’s not much room to grow outwards. More mass transit in and around the city would reduce the need to own a car.

perl4ever 7y ago

"Raising property value" is a positive externality. That's what the government exists for. If you only consider the bad effects of everything the government does and not the net, you're going to inevitably be an anarchist. Which is weird, because "externalities" started out being a way to attack private enterprise.

jellicle 7y ago

We need more growth in cities and less growth in "sprawl" areas.