4 ms·

Growing up in Middle America was nowhere near as depressing as you’re describing it. We had bikes to get around, woods and empty lots and big backyards and park

Growing up in Middle America was nowhere near as depressing as you’re describing it. We had bikes to get around, woods and empty lots and big backyards and parks to explore. Not to mention friends on the same block. Of course NYC would be much more exciting once you’re allowed to ride the train on your own.

wyre 4y ago
And now those woods are a new suburb, the empty lots a new target.
- tomc1985 4y ago
  Maybe on the popular coasts, but most of inner USA is little pockets of development spread out among large wilderness Hell even the California countryside is like this, once you get far enough away from the big cities
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - throwaway894345 4y ago
    Agreed. I think people on the coasts (or at least the east coast) fail to appreciate the vastness of the rest of the country that they so often look down on.
  - Tiktaalik 4y ago
    > once you get far enough away from the big cities This is the key statement. Build more SFH suburbs, gonna take you longer and longer to get far away from those cities.
    - tomc1985 4y ago
      Yes, but it really isn't that far. As soon as you leave the edge of suburba-mega-town you're in wilderness again. Where I live it's much less than a half-hour of driving, from the most interior parts of the city, in most conditions.
geoduck14 4y ago
Let the haters hate. It gives more outdoors to us.
- cpursley 4y ago
  Human-scale housing means more wilderness for everyone.
  - throwaway894345 4y ago
    I have no idea what “human scale housing” means, but single family housing is not a threat to wilderness in the US. There is a ton of wilderness in the US, and it is far more constrained by agriculture.
    - cpursley 4y ago
      Mixed use development where you can walk or bike to nearly all daily needs (work, grocery, kids school) within 20 or so mins.
      - bombcar 4y ago
        Work is usually the kicker, many suburbs are actually quite bikable if you're willing to bike on the street. What people really want is their work, stores, school of choice within walking/biking distance, which is harder to accomplish.
    - Tiktaalik 4y ago
      It's a geometry problem. SFH takes up too much space. You're absolutely correct that there's heaps of wilderness in the USA, but the more SFH there is, the more sprawl that is required, which means that that wilderness is further and further away. I'd rather get to the wilderness faster and not have to drive through hours and hours of sprawling SFH suburbs.
      - throwaway894345 4y ago
presentation 4y ago
I for one had a very isolated childhood because I couldn’t go anywhere on my own, and pretty much nobody in my development ever talked to each other, so I basically didn’t know anyone local. That said I didn’t know any better so I thought that was just normal and didn’t experience it negatively.
mellavora 4y ago
had. By the time I graduated college all of the empty fields and forests where I had roamed as a teenager were now developments.
- throwaway894345 4y ago
  Where? In the midwest fields and forests still dominate, and the west is still vast expanses of wilderness. I don’t think your experience generalizes well (although perhaps it is more common on this forum considering it’s atypical demographics).
  - bluGill 4y ago
    Sure, but odds are he lived in some outer suburb that is no longer the outer suburb. That woods might have hung on for a while, but it was always doomed just be the fact that it was near a large growing city where most people live and thus remember. Get out a little farther from the city and the wilderness is going to do just fine, but that isn't what people will remember as a kid just by virtual that they never lived near it.
    - throwaway894345 4y ago
      I don't doubt it's true for him. I'm expressing a doubt that it's indicative of the American landscape broadly, a claim which seems to be implied by his opening "had.".
kelnos 4y ago
Man, it just depends. In my youngest years, it was exactly as you describe. But then we moved to a new state. It was a little bit more suburban (not quite rural, but closer), and houses were a bit more spread out. Populated streets were more spread out, connected by roads I wouldn't feel safe cycling on as an adult, let alone allowing a child to do so. I couldn't wait to get my license to drive so I could actually do something outside the house without requiring permission.

wyre 4y ago

And now those woods are a new suburb, the empty lots a new target.

tomc1985 4y ago
Maybe on the popular coasts, but most of inner USA is little pockets of development spread out among large wilderness Hell even the California countryside is like this, once you get far enough away from the big cities
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- throwaway894345 4y ago
  Agreed. I think people on the coasts (or at least the east coast) fail to appreciate the vastness of the rest of the country that they so often look down on.
- Tiktaalik 4y ago
  > once you get far enough away from the big cities This is the key statement. Build more SFH suburbs, gonna take you longer and longer to get far away from those cities.
  - tomc1985 4y ago
    Yes, but it really isn't that far. As soon as you leave the edge of suburba-mega-town you're in wilderness again. Where I live it's much less than a half-hour of driving, from the most interior parts of the city, in most conditions.

geoduck14 4y ago

Let the haters hate. It gives more outdoors to us.

cpursley 4y ago
Human-scale housing means more wilderness for everyone.
- throwaway894345 4y ago
  I have no idea what “human scale housing” means, but single family housing is not a threat to wilderness in the US. There is a ton of wilderness in the US, and it is far more constrained by agriculture.
  - cpursley 4y ago
    Mixed use development where you can walk or bike to nearly all daily needs (work, grocery, kids school) within 20 or so mins.
    - bombcar 4y ago
      Work is usually the kicker, many suburbs are actually quite bikable if you're willing to bike on the street. What people really want is their work, stores, school of choice within walking/biking distance, which is harder to accomplish.
  - Tiktaalik 4y ago
    It's a geometry problem. SFH takes up too much space. You're absolutely correct that there's heaps of wilderness in the USA, but the more SFH there is, the more sprawl that is required, which means that that wilderness is further and further away. I'd rather get to the wilderness faster and not have to drive through hours and hours of sprawling SFH suburbs.
    - throwaway894345 4y ago

presentation 4y ago

I for one had a very isolated childhood because I couldn’t go anywhere on my own, and pretty much nobody in my development ever talked to each other, so I basically didn’t know anyone local. That said I didn’t know any better so I thought that was just normal and didn’t experience it negatively.

mellavora 4y ago

had. By the time I graduated college all of the empty fields and forests where I had roamed as a teenager were now developments.

throwaway894345 4y ago
Where? In the midwest fields and forests still dominate, and the west is still vast expanses of wilderness. I don’t think your experience generalizes well (although perhaps it is more common on this forum considering it’s atypical demographics).
- bluGill 4y ago
  Sure, but odds are he lived in some outer suburb that is no longer the outer suburb. That woods might have hung on for a while, but it was always doomed just be the fact that it was near a large growing city where most people live and thus remember. Get out a little farther from the city and the wilderness is going to do just fine, but that isn't what people will remember as a kid just by virtual that they never lived near it.
  - throwaway894345 4y ago
    I don't doubt it's true for him. I'm expressing a doubt that it's indicative of the American landscape broadly, a claim which seems to be implied by his opening "had.".

kelnos 4y ago

Man, it just depends. In my youngest years, it was exactly as you describe. But then we moved to a new state. It was a little bit more suburban (not quite rural, but closer), and houses were a bit more spread out. Populated streets were more spread out, connected by roads I wouldn't feel safe cycling on as an adult, let alone allowing a child to do so. I couldn't wait to get my license to drive so I could actually do something outside the house without requiring permission.