4 ms·

It's not a matter of subtractive solutions or not: It's that in a low-car environment, way too many people's real estate investments are worth near zero. How mu

It's not a matter of subtractive solutions or not: It's that in a low-car environment, way too many people's real estate investments are worth near zero. How much of, say, Suburban Florida remains usable if we price cars high enough to make their use unadvisable? Entire subdivisions are worth basically zero. Same thing with commercial areas that are not really reachable on foot. Old US cities only became car centric through massive amounts of pain and hardship, which happened to hit people that were mostly politically disenfranchised. Reshaping in the other direction would involve a similar amount of hardship, but on people that vote. We can make it easier to increase density, but the kind of efforts that would make us not end up relying on EVs have such economic and political costs that we lack the state capacity to go there.

ericmay 4y ago
> How much of, say, Suburban Florida remains usable if we price cars high enough to make their use unadvisable? Idk. How much remains usable if it’s under water? Should we let people in Florida tax the rest of the country for their road development? Can Florida afford to maintain and build the roads they want to build? > Old US cities only became car centric through massive amounts of pain and hardship, which happened to hit people that were mostly politically disenfranchised. Can you elaborate on this? How are you accounting for highway development that destroyed minority neighborhoods in this assessment?
- HDThoreaun 4y ago
  > How much remains usable if it’s under water South Florida will never be underwater. The government would build massive levees around the entire state before that happens.
  - ericmay 4y ago
    Levees break and they cost money. But this follows the same line of reasoning as: > How much of, say, Suburban Florida remains usable if we price cars high enough to make their use unadvisable? We'd just build the right transportation so that this doesn't matter.
    - HDThoreaun 4y ago
      You're ignoring the political reality that people want cars, not public transportation unfortunately.
      - ericmay 4y ago
        Well, many (not all) want car-only infrastructure, but they've also been unable to realize the true cost of their decisions, hence South Florida will be underwater. It costs too much money to build and maintain the infrastructure that would be required to maintain the lifestyle. So far things haven't gotten too bad but insurance companies are beginning to refuse to insure homes in Florida and so it has been left to the state to subsidize at a loss. Similarly as the state continues to build out unmaintainable car-only infrastructure and attempt to keep much of the state from "going underwater" it'll require either transfers of wealth from other states or increases in taxes. Neither of those proposals are politically viable either, so eventually the infrastructure just won't be maintained.

ericmay 4y ago

> How much of, say, Suburban Florida remains usable if we price cars high enough to make their use unadvisable? Idk. How much remains usable if it’s under water? Should we let people in Florida tax the rest of the country for their road development? Can Florida afford to maintain and build the roads they want to build? > Old US cities only became car centric through massive amounts of pain and hardship, which happened to hit people that were mostly politically disenfranchised. Can you elaborate on this? How are you accounting for highway development that destroyed minority neighborhoods in this assessment?

HDThoreaun 4y ago
> How much remains usable if it’s under water South Florida will never be underwater. The government would build massive levees around the entire state before that happens.
- ericmay 4y ago
  Levees break and they cost money. But this follows the same line of reasoning as: > How much of, say, Suburban Florida remains usable if we price cars high enough to make their use unadvisable? We'd just build the right transportation so that this doesn't matter.
  - HDThoreaun 4y ago
    You're ignoring the political reality that people want cars, not public transportation unfortunately.
    - ericmay 4y ago
      Well, many (not all) want car-only infrastructure, but they've also been unable to realize the true cost of their decisions, hence South Florida will be underwater. It costs too much money to build and maintain the infrastructure that would be required to maintain the lifestyle. So far things haven't gotten too bad but insurance companies are beginning to refuse to insure homes in Florida and so it has been left to the state to subsidize at a loss. Similarly as the state continues to build out unmaintainable car-only infrastructure and attempt to keep much of the state from "going underwater" it'll require either transfers of wealth from other states or increases in taxes. Neither of those proposals are politically viable either, so eventually the infrastructure just won't be maintained.