3 ms·

That same time period (post WWII) saw a large shift from rural to city (suburb or otherwise). How does that factor into your view of normal housing?

nine_k 5y ago
Cities had (and have) more and better jobs. Suburbs are, imho, the anti-city environment.
DoreenMichele 5y ago
I don't think that's all that important. There has been a general trend for a long time globally towards people leaving rural areas and moving to cities and suburbs. It is sometime in the past thirty years that I heard the announcement that global populations officially passed the fifty percent mark for human populations inhabiting cities more than rural areas for the first time in human history. Suburbs got thrown up at breathtaking speed in part because it was greenfield development, which lowered some barriers to development. There is some saying about "Good. Cheap. Fast. Pick two." At the time that they were carpeting the US at high speed, they were seen as good, cheap and fast. We are now seeing what the myriad hidden costs were, from cutting out lower income people to forcing people to be dependent on cars to cutting out people of color and also having environmental costs that were not factored in at the time. The birth of the suburb predates the environmental movement. The birth of the suburb is generally traced to Levittown in the late 1940s-early 1950s. The environmental movement is generally traced to the publication of a book called Silent Spring in 1962. https://frontlineielts.com/the-birth-of-suburbia/ https://frontlineielts.com/the-birth-of-suburbia/ https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silent_Spring https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silent_Spring
- earleybird 5y ago
  For continental US, I believe it was around the 1920's[0] while globally, yes it wasn't until 2007 or thereabouts. From an admittedly superficial review, it has been Africa, India and perhaps(?) China that have been undergoing the most urbanization over the last 100 years. Then again, perhaps it's not urbanization per se, maybe it's more total population size. Homeostasis will find a balance point (if one exists). [0]https://www.khanacademy.org/humanities/us-history/the-gilded-age/gilded-age/a/america-moves-to-the-city https://www.khanacademy.org/humanities/us-history/the-gilded... [1]https://ourworldindata.org/urbanization#share-of-populations-living-in-urban-areas https://ourworldindata.org/urbanization#share-of-populations... granted this only goes back to 1960

nine_k 5y ago

Cities had (and have) more and better jobs. Suburbs are, imho, the anti-city environment.

DoreenMichele 5y ago

I don't think that's all that important. There has been a general trend for a long time globally towards people leaving rural areas and moving to cities and suburbs. It is sometime in the past thirty years that I heard the announcement that global populations officially passed the fifty percent mark for human populations inhabiting cities more than rural areas for the first time in human history. Suburbs got thrown up at breathtaking speed in part because it was greenfield development, which lowered some barriers to development. There is some saying about "Good. Cheap. Fast. Pick two." At the time that they were carpeting the US at high speed, they were seen as good, cheap and fast. We are now seeing what the myriad hidden costs were, from cutting out lower income people to forcing people to be dependent on cars to cutting out people of color and also having environmental costs that were not factored in at the time. The birth of the suburb predates the environmental movement. The birth of the suburb is generally traced to Levittown in the late 1940s-early 1950s. The environmental movement is generally traced to the publication of a book called Silent Spring in 1962. https://frontlineielts.com/the-birth-of-suburbia/ https://frontlineielts.com/the-birth-of-suburbia/ https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silent_Spring https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silent_Spring

earleybird 5y ago
For continental US, I believe it was around the 1920's[0] while globally, yes it wasn't until 2007 or thereabouts. From an admittedly superficial review, it has been Africa, India and perhaps(?) China that have been undergoing the most urbanization over the last 100 years. Then again, perhaps it's not urbanization per se, maybe it's more total population size. Homeostasis will find a balance point (if one exists). [0]https://www.khanacademy.org/humanities/us-history/the-gilded-age/gilded-age/a/america-moves-to-the-city https://www.khanacademy.org/humanities/us-history/the-gilded... [1]https://ourworldindata.org/urbanization#share-of-populations-living-in-urban-areas https://ourworldindata.org/urbanization#share-of-populations... granted this only goes back to 1960