3 ms·

I'm mixed on this, because US cities + towns are already at a significant disadvantage when it comes to their inherent pleasant-ness/beauty when compared to a l

by kirse 4y ago

I'm mixed on this, because US cities + towns are already at a significant disadvantage when it comes to their inherent pleasant-ness/beauty when compared to a lot of cities and towns in European countries. If we didn't defend some level of standards it'd be a far worse utilitarian mess. I do love the US but so many of our cities really are garbage... they stink, buildings are dirty from pollution, roads are littered with potholes and trash, etc. I really don't get why people love NYC that much unless you grew up in the environment and view it as normal.

dougmwne 4y ago
The NIMBYism is one of the reasons US cities suck. The primary aim of NIMBY is to lower density because less supply=higher prices. All these efforts to block new construction and multi-use development yield sprawl and car culture.
- hytdstd 4y ago
  > The primary aim of NIMBY is to lower density because less supply=higher prices I don't think this is actually true. If you spend enough time on Nextdoor and read what nimby's complain about, the chief concerns are traffic, parking, and congestion (after crime and safety). Obviously, there are nimby's who are concerned with their property values, but the average 75 year old nimby isn't interested in selling/moving their property.
  - kmeisthax 4y ago
    Lowering supply is an instrumental goal[0], not a final goal. If you hate traffic, want more parking, or the like; the easiest way to do that is to just stop building housing, throw up your hands, and say the city's full. But because doing that also makes your own property more valuable, both complaints are intermingled: people who want more money in their pocket can concern-troll about traffic to sound prosocial. In fact, this commingling has happened for so long that it is difficult to separate out the two concerns. [0] AI ethicist jargon for "prerequisite you have to do to accomplish a lot of disparate or conflicting goals".
    - hytdstd 4y ago
      I don't really have any evidence for this, but I always imagined the nimby's who care most about property values would concern-troll about housing projects being "affordable", or their "environmental impact".
  - modeless 4y ago
    You don't need to be selling immediately to be interested in property values. HELOCs are popular, refinancing is popular, and there's the estate to think about. People may not explicitly say "I'm propping up my property value", but actions speak louder than words.
    - dougmwne 4y ago
      Exactly, and plenty of people like the ego boost of an unrealized gain going up and up, even if they plan to never realize it. The homeowners I know only talk about their property values every chance they get and every other breath.
UncleOxidant 4y ago
> I do love the US but so many of our cities really are garbage. Indeed. The reason it feels so different in many European cities (and feels much better IMO) is that they are human scale instead of automobile scale. See James Howard Kunstler's The Geography of Nowhere https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/125313.The_Geography_of_Nowhere https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/125313.The_Geography_of_...
ch4s3 4y ago
Sure, some old cities in Europe look great, but a lot of what was rebuilt after WWII looks like shit. NYC is actually a really pleasant place to live in a lot of respects, and I've lived in several other places. The real problem here is that housing is so expensive. You could drop a bunch of 8-10 story buildings on corners near trains here and you wouldn't really even notice at street level but it would add a lot of housing.

by kirse 4y ago

dougmwne 4y ago

The NIMBYism is one of the reasons US cities suck. The primary aim of NIMBY is to lower density because less supply=higher prices. All these efforts to block new construction and multi-use development yield sprawl and car culture.

hytdstd 4y ago
> The primary aim of NIMBY is to lower density because less supply=higher prices I don't think this is actually true. If you spend enough time on Nextdoor and read what nimby's complain about, the chief concerns are traffic, parking, and congestion (after crime and safety). Obviously, there are nimby's who are concerned with their property values, but the average 75 year old nimby isn't interested in selling/moving their property.
- kmeisthax 4y ago
  Lowering supply is an instrumental goal[0], not a final goal. If you hate traffic, want more parking, or the like; the easiest way to do that is to just stop building housing, throw up your hands, and say the city's full. But because doing that also makes your own property more valuable, both complaints are intermingled: people who want more money in their pocket can concern-troll about traffic to sound prosocial. In fact, this commingling has happened for so long that it is difficult to separate out the two concerns. [0] AI ethicist jargon for "prerequisite you have to do to accomplish a lot of disparate or conflicting goals".
  - hytdstd 4y ago
    I don't really have any evidence for this, but I always imagined the nimby's who care most about property values would concern-troll about housing projects being "affordable", or their "environmental impact".
- modeless 4y ago
  You don't need to be selling immediately to be interested in property values. HELOCs are popular, refinancing is popular, and there's the estate to think about. People may not explicitly say "I'm propping up my property value", but actions speak louder than words.
  - dougmwne 4y ago
    Exactly, and plenty of people like the ego boost of an unrealized gain going up and up, even if they plan to never realize it. The homeowners I know only talk about their property values every chance they get and every other breath.

UncleOxidant 4y ago

> I do love the US but so many of our cities really are garbage. Indeed. The reason it feels so different in many European cities (and feels much better IMO) is that they are human scale instead of automobile scale. See James Howard Kunstler's The Geography of Nowhere https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/125313.The_Geography_of_Nowhere https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/125313.The_Geography_of_...

ch4s3 4y ago

Sure, some old cities in Europe look great, but a lot of what was rebuilt after WWII looks like shit. NYC is actually a really pleasant place to live in a lot of respects, and I've lived in several other places. The real problem here is that housing is so expensive. You could drop a bunch of 8-10 story buildings on corners near trains here and you wouldn't really even notice at street level but it would add a lot of housing.