4 ms·

We all know that to combat climate change sacrifices will need to be made like fewer cars and smaller houses (for compact, accessible cities). Is this really a

by kiba 5y ago

We all know that to combat climate change sacrifices will need to be made like fewer cars and smaller houses (for compact, accessible cities). Is this really a sacrifice? I can't see the US ever being willing to make these sacrifices though. If you compare the $/sqft for housing in the US vs. Europe the difference is shocking (even in big cities like Seattle vs. London), same for gasoline prices, etc. I would be more concerned with urban design and zoning than square footage. Bigger house means more maintenance, and bigger lot means more mowing. I for one, hate mowing. The US has become accustomed to unparalleled comfort and luxury, with central air conditioning and multiple cars practically the norm. If anything, I imagine they'll try to enforce strict emissions controls on developing nations to have the pretence of doing something. A car is not a luxury. It is an unfortunate and out of control necessity that helps increases the cost of living and make societies less egalitarian, because it is a requirement to use car to do anything of note.

after_care 5y ago
I live in a suburb of a medium sized city. It’s not particularly dense, probably slightly lower density than the median American lives in. My generation Z neighbors (I have two) are very happy to live without a car. They live within three miles of their jobs and use electric scooters for commuting. They have their food and consumer goods shipped to their house. They say that they don’t need to drive anywhere, and the occasion that they want to go somewhere Uber is available. Meanwhile they are saving hundreds to thousands of dollars a month by not having two cars. I personally (a millennial) have put less than five thousand miles on my car in the last 5 years. People say cars are a requirement for American life, but I find that’s becoming less true for more and more Americans.
- bobthepanda 5y ago
  What is the real estate square foot cost where you live? Maybe more media-visible Americans are living in such areas now, but supply is extremely tight. A lot of these neighborhoods tend to be older, being poor in previous decades, and now those poor people are getting pushed out to the suburbs where cars are a great required expense.
- bradlys 5y ago
  Where are you living? Sounds like you and your neighbors are shut ins who just stream twitch all night. That’s fine but I wouldn’t consider that the norm for gen z or even millennials. (Even if it is popular) If you go out a few times a week, not having a car in most American cities is quite difficult/burdensome/expensive. Uber alone would be $100 round trip if I wanted to go into the city from where I live. Public transit? Isn’t available past 11pm.
captainredbeard 5y ago
> Is this really a sacrifice? For many people, yes. > Bigger house means more maintenance, and bigger lot means more mowing. I for one, hate mowing. No one is forcing you to buy a big home with a maintenance burden. Out of respect, don't force other people into buying smaller ones.
- emodendroket 5y ago
  That's really sidestepping the issue, isn't it? It's not just about respect and freedom. It's about the externalities created by many people living in large homes.
  - captainredbeard 5y ago
    Maybe
  - kiba 5y ago
    Not really possible to make much choices, when zoning laws made many things illegal, such as mandating minimum lot size and banning higher density development and so forth.
    - emodendroket 5y ago
      Sure, the world of infinite choice is a fantasy anyway. But even if it weren't, I don't think the argument would be very strong.
  - bradlys 5y ago
    The externalities don’t come from living in large homes. They come from the use of non-renewable resources. Focus on that dude. Stop trying to make everyone live in an SRO. You can easily give everyone a McMansion and live in some sub 1.5C utopia as long as we focus on where we get our energy and resources from. Stop focusing on consumption quantity because it just sounds like envy.
    - emodendroket 5y ago

by kiba 5y ago

after_care 5y ago

I live in a suburb of a medium sized city. It’s not particularly dense, probably slightly lower density than the median American lives in. My generation Z neighbors (I have two) are very happy to live without a car. They live within three miles of their jobs and use electric scooters for commuting. They have their food and consumer goods shipped to their house. They say that they don’t need to drive anywhere, and the occasion that they want to go somewhere Uber is available. Meanwhile they are saving hundreds to thousands of dollars a month by not having two cars. I personally (a millennial) have put less than five thousand miles on my car in the last 5 years. People say cars are a requirement for American life, but I find that’s becoming less true for more and more Americans.

bobthepanda 5y ago
What is the real estate square foot cost where you live? Maybe more media-visible Americans are living in such areas now, but supply is extremely tight. A lot of these neighborhoods tend to be older, being poor in previous decades, and now those poor people are getting pushed out to the suburbs where cars are a great required expense.
bradlys 5y ago
Where are you living? Sounds like you and your neighbors are shut ins who just stream twitch all night. That’s fine but I wouldn’t consider that the norm for gen z or even millennials. (Even if it is popular) If you go out a few times a week, not having a car in most American cities is quite difficult/burdensome/expensive. Uber alone would be $100 round trip if I wanted to go into the city from where I live. Public transit? Isn’t available past 11pm.

captainredbeard 5y ago

> Is this really a sacrifice? For many people, yes. > Bigger house means more maintenance, and bigger lot means more mowing. I for one, hate mowing. No one is forcing you to buy a big home with a maintenance burden. Out of respect, don't force other people into buying smaller ones.

emodendroket 5y ago
That's really sidestepping the issue, isn't it? It's not just about respect and freedom. It's about the externalities created by many people living in large homes.
- captainredbeard 5y ago
  Maybe
- kiba 5y ago
  Not really possible to make much choices, when zoning laws made many things illegal, such as mandating minimum lot size and banning higher density development and so forth.
  - emodendroket 5y ago
    Sure, the world of infinite choice is a fantasy anyway. But even if it weren't, I don't think the argument would be very strong.
- bradlys 5y ago
  The externalities don’t come from living in large homes. They come from the use of non-renewable resources. Focus on that dude. Stop trying to make everyone live in an SRO. You can easily give everyone a McMansion and live in some sub 1.5C utopia as long as we focus on where we get our energy and resources from. Stop focusing on consumption quantity because it just sounds like envy.
  - emodendroket 5y ago