6 ms·

> How long until climate change or expensive gasoline forces people to just stay home?? Yes, this is just the beginning of the end. I would even say this is th

> How long until climate change or expensive gasoline forces people to just stay home?? Yes, this is just the beginning of the end. I would even say this is the beginning of the end for cities as we know them. I think 80-90% of all white collar jobs will leave cities and suburbia. This will really change the dynamics.

bogle 5y ago
That's unlikely. For a start, many people like living in the city. It's fun and their friends and family are all there. Then there's everyone with children at school so they're not going to mess with the kids' education and friendship group. Another big problem is rural broadband. I know the countryside is nice, I may well retire there, but it's not where I am now and it's only a very small number of people who like the isolation.
- incomingpain 5y ago
  >That's unlikely. For a start, many people like living in the city. It's fun and their friends and family are all there. Then there's everyone with children at school so they're not going to mess with the kids' education and friendship group Down on my imaginary future ranch, I have a 10kw solar array charging my cybertruck and it drives me to the concerts, friends/family, and all that for free. Children playing at the park? Is that even a thing anymore? Xbox/PS# seems to be replacing that entirely. We could discuss if this is a good thing or not but that same cybertruck can self-drive the kids to wherever they are meeting up. >Another big problem is rural broadband. I know the countryside is nice, I may well retire there, but it's not where I am now and it's only a very small number of people who like the isolation. That's what just broke. Why suddenly this became a thing. Starlink or 5g with long range 5ghz wireless backhaul. Rural suddenly has good relatively reliable fast internet access.
  - lampshades 5y ago
    > Children playing at the park? Is that even a thing anymore? Have you been to a park in a child-raising area lately? They are absolutely packed all the time with kids. Sure, you don't see them downtown, but you head out to the suburbs and you absolutely do.
    - incomingpain 5y ago
      >Have you been to a park in a child-raising area lately? They are absolutely packed all the time with kids. Sure, you don't see them downtown, but you head out to the suburbs and you absolutely do. Oh for sure. If the kid is not quite old enough for the xbox/ps# age. They are totally out at the park. You never see kids out above whatever that age is. I did see some older kids out tobaganning this winter. maybe in the age 8 range, which is unusually old compared to the playground soccer field age kids. My comment stands for sure.
incomingpain 5y ago
>Yes, this is just the beginning of the end. I would even say this is the beginning of the end for cities as we know them. I think 80-90% of all white collar jobs will leave cities and suburbia. This will really change the dynamics. This is actually a super interesting subject I haven't considered. What is the tenability of cities without fossil fuels? I think we do know, it's really the cities that collapse. Farmers might emit lots of CO2 and carbon taxes directly attack them, but ultimately they cant go anywhere. The cities need to eat. So those carbon taxes don't harm them at all. How does public transit work? Generally speaking they are all diesel. Do we have a plan to spend a trillion $ converting this all to electric? What's even the point of giant office buildings anymore? Downtown cores are dying if not dead as it is. When people stay home, the sharwarma spot downtown wont be able to afford to stay. It's obvious what will eventually happen. These office buildings convert to high density residential. However, what happens after that? If I am 100% remote, why even be in the expensive high tax city? I could go buy 10 acres and pay $100/year in nonsense taxes. Do my own utilities. never again worry about nuclear war because nobody will be nuking rural areas. I really dont think we have quite thought out the consequences of our actions.
- sylens 5y ago
  Cities existed before oil. A city without cars can actually be a massive improvement
  - incomingpain 5y ago
    >Cities existed before oil. A city without cars can actually be a massive improvement True but cities required domestication of the horse. There were literally horse shit all over the roads and the occasional dead horse that was abandoned. The answer isn't subways or monorails neither. The answer may be robotaxis. I am very optimistic that this could solve a large degree of the issues.
    - afiori 5y ago
      If you were to replace all inbound/outbound subway connection of Manhattan with bridges and car traffic you would need 49 bridges the size of Manhattan bridge as a replacement. Cars are very useful to go wherever you want, but are literally the worst for volume. Similarly to how trucks are necessary to move stuff around but they cannot replace train freight/air planes/container ships.
helen___keller 5y ago
> I would even say this is the beginning of the end for cities as we know them. Alternate POV: this could save cities as we know them. All top American cities have been struggling for about 20 years now to handle urban growth, as cost of living goes through the roof and small businesses disappear when their renewed lease comes at twice the rent. As always, the survivors are those who can afford the change: homeowners and the wealthy on the residential side (keep in mind cities like Boston are majority renter), and large corporate renters on the business side (think Starbucks instead of Local Coffee Co) Pre-war growth patterns (ie, densification and transit) have been generally outlawed, and big companies seem to have endless pockets to raise salaries to attract more highly paid workers to compete on rent; so there’s been no counterbalance on this trend. Until remote work. Right now cities are still expensive, but the next few years as we transition out of the pandemic will determine whether remote work is here to stay; if so, you will likely see another suburban migration of ‘former reluctant office workers’ (we already had one wave at the start of the pandemic), and city real estate might finally cool off for the first time in decades
- afiori 5y ago
  To add a reference: Suburbia is Subsidized: Here's the Math -> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Nw6qyyrTeI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Nw6qyyrTeI Essentially urban sprawl/suburbia/single family homes cost more for the city (road upkeep, water/gas pipes, etc.) than what they contribute in taxes, so many cities are in a positive feedback loop of building more houses to get quick money to do maintenance on the previous rounds of growth.
  - greedo 5y ago
    Simple solution, raise taxes. Same with highway/Interstate maintenance. Raise the Federal gas tax (which hasn't tracked inflation for ages).
- lukebuehler 5y ago
  I should have put more emphasis on "as we know them." I think think cities will exist for sure, and they might be better. So I agree with you there, and I actually hope the same. But modern cities have had two phases: first industrial growth, and more recently white collar/information worker city cores. Industry will still exist, but has already moved further out from city centers and cores. Currently, the life blood of large cities is closely tied up with the mega corps having their ego towers there and thus attracting innumerable highly paid workers which then spend their money in those city cores. With that going away and/or substantially changing, cities will change drastically too.
larrymyers 5y ago
I expect that opposite will happen. Cities that are built for people (and not cars) will thrive. Nobody wants to drive everywhere. Cities that support multi-modal transportation and have mixed residential / commercial centers will thrive. Chicago does this well. From my front door I have the follow options: * The El (train, local stops) * Metra (train, commuter that gets out to the burbs) * Bus * Taxi * Divvy (e-bike rentals) * Personal bike * Walking ... and finally, yes, I can drive. But driving sucks. It's slow, expensive, and you still have to find parking.
- incomingpain 5y ago
  Kind of offtopic, but how about safety consideration? Chicago is represented as quite dangerous in the media. As a resident, is the danger true?
  - larrymyers 5y ago
    No, Chicago is not dangerous on a per-capita basis. The news is incentivized to get attention, and "OMG you'll get robbed and shot" is a very effective and crude way to get those clicks. Chicago is no different than any other large city in that being aware of your surroundings and not doing dumb things is expected.
    - seanmcdirmid 5y ago
      Chicago is no St. Louis or New Orleans, but 1000 out of 100k is 1%. One of the reasons I never consider living in the midwest again (Toledo) is because my bike was stolen so many times as a kid. Crime doesn't make for nice living.
  - granshaw 5y ago
    4+ year Chicago resident here. Chicago neighborhoods vary night and day to each other. Crime is very well contained to the dangerous ones, and the neighborhoods where are tech worker can afford and would want to stay in are very safe.
jabroni_salad 5y ago
>will leave cities wouldn't that be the opposite? Where I live right now, the nearest grocery store is in the next town over and there is zero public infrastructure to get there. There is no uber or taxi or bus. You just don't live here without a car, period.
- lukebuehler 5y ago
  Jobs will leave the cities insofar as they are not bound to the city anymore. People might decide to stay in one city or another, but the job will not define where and how, this will change the dynamics

bogle 5y ago

That's unlikely. For a start, many people like living in the city. It's fun and their friends and family are all there. Then there's everyone with children at school so they're not going to mess with the kids' education and friendship group. Another big problem is rural broadband. I know the countryside is nice, I may well retire there, but it's not where I am now and it's only a very small number of people who like the isolation.

incomingpain 5y ago
>That's unlikely. For a start, many people like living in the city. It's fun and their friends and family are all there. Then there's everyone with children at school so they're not going to mess with the kids' education and friendship group Down on my imaginary future ranch, I have a 10kw solar array charging my cybertruck and it drives me to the concerts, friends/family, and all that for free. Children playing at the park? Is that even a thing anymore? Xbox/PS# seems to be replacing that entirely. We could discuss if this is a good thing or not but that same cybertruck can self-drive the kids to wherever they are meeting up. >Another big problem is rural broadband. I know the countryside is nice, I may well retire there, but it's not where I am now and it's only a very small number of people who like the isolation. That's what just broke. Why suddenly this became a thing. Starlink or 5g with long range 5ghz wireless backhaul. Rural suddenly has good relatively reliable fast internet access.
- lampshades 5y ago
  > Children playing at the park? Is that even a thing anymore? Have you been to a park in a child-raising area lately? They are absolutely packed all the time with kids. Sure, you don't see them downtown, but you head out to the suburbs and you absolutely do.
  - incomingpain 5y ago
    >Have you been to a park in a child-raising area lately? They are absolutely packed all the time with kids. Sure, you don't see them downtown, but you head out to the suburbs and you absolutely do. Oh for sure. If the kid is not quite old enough for the xbox/ps# age. They are totally out at the park. You never see kids out above whatever that age is. I did see some older kids out tobaganning this winter. maybe in the age 8 range, which is unusually old compared to the playground soccer field age kids. My comment stands for sure.

incomingpain 5y ago

>Yes, this is just the beginning of the end. I would even say this is the beginning of the end for cities as we know them. I think 80-90% of all white collar jobs will leave cities and suburbia. This will really change the dynamics. This is actually a super interesting subject I haven't considered. What is the tenability of cities without fossil fuels? I think we do know, it's really the cities that collapse. Farmers might emit lots of CO2 and carbon taxes directly attack them, but ultimately they cant go anywhere. The cities need to eat. So those carbon taxes don't harm them at all. How does public transit work? Generally speaking they are all diesel. Do we have a plan to spend a trillion $ converting this all to electric? What's even the point of giant office buildings anymore? Downtown cores are dying if not dead as it is. When people stay home, the sharwarma spot downtown wont be able to afford to stay. It's obvious what will eventually happen. These office buildings convert to high density residential. However, what happens after that? If I am 100% remote, why even be in the expensive high tax city? I could go buy 10 acres and pay $100/year in nonsense taxes. Do my own utilities. never again worry about nuclear war because nobody will be nuking rural areas. I really dont think we have quite thought out the consequences of our actions.

sylens 5y ago
Cities existed before oil. A city without cars can actually be a massive improvement
- incomingpain 5y ago
  >Cities existed before oil. A city without cars can actually be a massive improvement True but cities required domestication of the horse. There were literally horse shit all over the roads and the occasional dead horse that was abandoned. The answer isn't subways or monorails neither. The answer may be robotaxis. I am very optimistic that this could solve a large degree of the issues.
  - afiori 5y ago
    If you were to replace all inbound/outbound subway connection of Manhattan with bridges and car traffic you would need 49 bridges the size of Manhattan bridge as a replacement. Cars are very useful to go wherever you want, but are literally the worst for volume. Similarly to how trucks are necessary to move stuff around but they cannot replace train freight/air planes/container ships.

helen___keller 5y ago

> I would even say this is the beginning of the end for cities as we know them. Alternate POV: this could save cities as we know them. All top American cities have been struggling for about 20 years now to handle urban growth, as cost of living goes through the roof and small businesses disappear when their renewed lease comes at twice the rent. As always, the survivors are those who can afford the change: homeowners and the wealthy on the residential side (keep in mind cities like Boston are majority renter), and large corporate renters on the business side (think Starbucks instead of Local Coffee Co) Pre-war growth patterns (ie, densification and transit) have been generally outlawed, and big companies seem to have endless pockets to raise salaries to attract more highly paid workers to compete on rent; so there’s been no counterbalance on this trend. Until remote work. Right now cities are still expensive, but the next few years as we transition out of the pandemic will determine whether remote work is here to stay; if so, you will likely see another suburban migration of ‘former reluctant office workers’ (we already had one wave at the start of the pandemic), and city real estate might finally cool off for the first time in decades

afiori 5y ago
To add a reference: Suburbia is Subsidized: Here's the Math -> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Nw6qyyrTeI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Nw6qyyrTeI Essentially urban sprawl/suburbia/single family homes cost more for the city (road upkeep, water/gas pipes, etc.) than what they contribute in taxes, so many cities are in a positive feedback loop of building more houses to get quick money to do maintenance on the previous rounds of growth.
- greedo 5y ago
  Simple solution, raise taxes. Same with highway/Interstate maintenance. Raise the Federal gas tax (which hasn't tracked inflation for ages).
lukebuehler 5y ago
I should have put more emphasis on "as we know them." I think think cities will exist for sure, and they might be better. So I agree with you there, and I actually hope the same. But modern cities have had two phases: first industrial growth, and more recently white collar/information worker city cores. Industry will still exist, but has already moved further out from city centers and cores. Currently, the life blood of large cities is closely tied up with the mega corps having their ego towers there and thus attracting innumerable highly paid workers which then spend their money in those city cores. With that going away and/or substantially changing, cities will change drastically too.

larrymyers 5y ago

I expect that opposite will happen. Cities that are built for people (and not cars) will thrive. Nobody wants to drive everywhere. Cities that support multi-modal transportation and have mixed residential / commercial centers will thrive. Chicago does this well. From my front door I have the follow options: * The El (train, local stops) * Metra (train, commuter that gets out to the burbs) * Bus * Taxi * Divvy (e-bike rentals) * Personal bike * Walking ... and finally, yes, I can drive. But driving sucks. It's slow, expensive, and you still have to find parking.

incomingpain 5y ago
Kind of offtopic, but how about safety consideration? Chicago is represented as quite dangerous in the media. As a resident, is the danger true?
- larrymyers 5y ago
  No, Chicago is not dangerous on a per-capita basis. The news is incentivized to get attention, and "OMG you'll get robbed and shot" is a very effective and crude way to get those clicks. Chicago is no different than any other large city in that being aware of your surroundings and not doing dumb things is expected.
  - seanmcdirmid 5y ago
    Chicago is no St. Louis or New Orleans, but 1000 out of 100k is 1%. One of the reasons I never consider living in the midwest again (Toledo) is because my bike was stolen so many times as a kid. Crime doesn't make for nice living.
- granshaw 5y ago
  4+ year Chicago resident here. Chicago neighborhoods vary night and day to each other. Crime is very well contained to the dangerous ones, and the neighborhoods where are tech worker can afford and would want to stay in are very safe.

jabroni_salad 5y ago

>will leave cities wouldn't that be the opposite? Where I live right now, the nearest grocery store is in the next town over and there is zero public infrastructure to get there. There is no uber or taxi or bus. You just don't live here without a car, period.

lukebuehler 5y ago
Jobs will leave the cities insofar as they are not bound to the city anymore. People might decide to stay in one city or another, but the job will not define where and how, this will change the dynamics