4 ms·
Correct. Was talking about the sheer size of many countries in NA makes it a much different situation than many countries in Europe. Could've been much clearer
by samrmay 6y ago
Correct. Was talking about the sheer size of many countries in NA makes it a much different situation than many countries in Europe. Could've been much clearer so I apologize.
- caturopath 6y agoI don't see what the size of the country has much to do with how we get around in town. No pedestrians or bicyclists die on I-95, and few motorists do to boot. The issue is with cars inside cities, not the space between them. Of course you get between cities with cars, long-distance busses/trains, and flying.
- AnimalMuppet 6y agoThe size of the country (relative to the population) means that land is relatively cheap. That leads to relatively less dense cities (at least most of them).
- caturopath 6y agoSprawl isn't a natural result of a large country, nor is US land unbelievably cheap (it's all over the place, with some expensive peaks in some high-sprawl areas). Belize and Norway are extremely low density overall in their countries: they have very different house prices, but neither has much sprawl. Sprawl is a result of policy decisions.
- imtringued 6y agoLand isn't cheap if you have to maintain infrastructure around it. Exclusive single family zoning is a pure loss. Single family housing should exist but it should be reserved for those who really want/need it. It's not something everyone should have because it doesn't match people's real needs.
- cycomanic 6y agoI would say the bay area is a pretty good counter argument.