5 ms·

There is plenty of land, just not in desirable locations. But if you could build infrastructure easily and with speed, maybe those locations can be transformed

by doh 5y ago

There is plenty of land, just not in desirable locations. But if you could build infrastructure easily and with speed, maybe those locations can be transformed too. Up until last 40 years ago people didn't want to live on the ocean. Now they can't get enough. US has a huge swaths of land empty, especially in the Pacific Northwest.

wing-_-nuts 5y ago
>Up until last 40 years ago people didn't want to live on the ocean. Now they can't get enough. US has a huge swaths of land empty, especially in the Pacific Northwest. Can you expand on this please? What do you mean by 'people didn't want to live on the ocean' and also, what do you mean by 'vast swaths of empty land in the PNW'. Are you talking east of the cascades? I don't think there is a whole lot of land there with an oceanic climate?
- doh 5y ago
  > What do you mean by 'people didn't want to live on the ocean' I remember Arnold Schwarzenegger being confused why "nobody" wanted to live in Santa Monica or Venice Beach to a point that the government was subsidizing it to attract people. For instance north of San Diego there are old apartment buildings on the water that have only window facing the ocean in their bathroom. Historically ocean was considered as a hassle. You have to deal with the salty air that breaks down many material quite swiftly. In Turkey, fathers would give the prime land to their sons (pastures) and the crap land to their daughters (ocean fronts). How the world changed. > what do you mean by 'vast swaths of empty land in the PNW' If you go anywhere outside of the majors settlements there are major swaths of empty land which is fairly cheap, but there is no infrastructure there and people don't want to be the city founders anymore.
  - danans 5y ago
    > Historically ocean was considered as a hassle. You have to deal with the salty air that breaks down many material quite swiftly. Not only that, but you don't have to go very far from the ocean for the saltiness of the air to diminish, so there's not much sacrifice if you value being at the ocean. There's also a social element to it. Historically, most of the people living by an ocean were those traditionally employed in traditionally ocean-related industries, like fishing, canning, and shipping. These are traditionally associated with a grimier and more impoverished state of existence, because in most industrial cities, that's how oceanfronts were (or still are).
    - doh 5y ago
      I think this is even better explanation.
- soperj 5y ago
  The entire west coast of Washington state is pretty well uninhabited, as well as anything West of Port Angeles to Neah Bay.

by doh 5y ago

wing-_-nuts 5y ago

>Up until last 40 years ago people didn't want to live on the ocean. Now they can't get enough. US has a huge swaths of land empty, especially in the Pacific Northwest. Can you expand on this please? What do you mean by 'people didn't want to live on the ocean' and also, what do you mean by 'vast swaths of empty land in the PNW'. Are you talking east of the cascades? I don't think there is a whole lot of land there with an oceanic climate?

doh 5y ago
> What do you mean by 'people didn't want to live on the ocean' I remember Arnold Schwarzenegger being confused why "nobody" wanted to live in Santa Monica or Venice Beach to a point that the government was subsidizing it to attract people. For instance north of San Diego there are old apartment buildings on the water that have only window facing the ocean in their bathroom. Historically ocean was considered as a hassle. You have to deal with the salty air that breaks down many material quite swiftly. In Turkey, fathers would give the prime land to their sons (pastures) and the crap land to their daughters (ocean fronts). How the world changed. > what do you mean by 'vast swaths of empty land in the PNW' If you go anywhere outside of the majors settlements there are major swaths of empty land which is fairly cheap, but there is no infrastructure there and people don't want to be the city founders anymore.
- danans 5y ago
  > Historically ocean was considered as a hassle. You have to deal with the salty air that breaks down many material quite swiftly. Not only that, but you don't have to go very far from the ocean for the saltiness of the air to diminish, so there's not much sacrifice if you value being at the ocean. There's also a social element to it. Historically, most of the people living by an ocean were those traditionally employed in traditionally ocean-related industries, like fishing, canning, and shipping. These are traditionally associated with a grimier and more impoverished state of existence, because in most industrial cities, that's how oceanfronts were (or still are).
  - doh 5y ago
    I think this is even better explanation.
soperj 5y ago
The entire west coast of Washington state is pretty well uninhabited, as well as anything West of Port Angeles to Neah Bay.