7 ms·

I'll counter this - the majority of the people in the US want to live somewhere and get around in the least difficult method. Due to decades of policymaking, t

I'll counter this - the majority of the people in the US want to live somewhere and get around in the least difficult method. Due to decades of policymaking, that happens to be houses and cars. It's very nearsighted to think our model is the penultimate in structuring society. Plenty of people are happy, fulfilled, and productive living in apartments & townhouses while taking trains to work.

ipaddr 4y ago
Why would someone prefer to live like ants? Moving from a large place with a forest backyard to a tiny apartment is a lower standard of living. You live in an apartment and trade away personal space and still have to take a train to work where you get little personal space. People can be happy in an apartment but most would trade that in for a house they could afford it.
- Dylan16807 4y ago
  > Why would someone prefer to live like ants? Why would someone prefer to live like a snail? > Moving from a large place with a forest backyard to a tiny apartment is a lower standard of living. You live in an apartment and trade away personal space and still have to take a train to work where you get little personal space. A house does not imply a large backyard. Suburbs are the bigger problem, and they don't usually have much forest. And apartments don't have to be tiny. If you're comparing against a house in a similar location, that buys a lot of apartment space.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- nayuki 4y ago
  > prefer to live like ants Unnecessarily inflammatory wording. (Don't use the popular "shoebox" either.) > Moving from a large place with a forest backyard Most Americans live in suburban houses and over 90% of suburbs don't have a forest backyard. You're painting a sunny caricature. > tiny apartment Apartments come in a range of sizes, easily from 300 sq ft to 2000 sq ft. You get what you pay for. With houses, the minimum size is so large that many people have no choice but to overpay for space they don't need. > lower standard of living Being in proximity to people, shopping, and businesses, as well as having a shorter commute to work, contribute to a higher standard of living.
  - tssva 4y ago
    > Being in proximity to people, shopping, and businesses, as well as having a shorter commute to work, contribute to a higher standard of living. I live in a suburb. I'm in proximity to people, shopping and businesses. In fact, I'm in closer proximity to shopping and businesses than most residential areas in the closest city. Most of the large employers in my area are also in the suburbs so, commuting would be even longer living in the city since it would involve taking public transportation or driving from the city to the suburbs. Even if I lived and worked in the city walking, taking a bus or the subway from residential areas to the employment centers would take longer than my 15-minute commute.
- alexchantavy 4y ago
  Eh, people can like different things. I think "most feel house > apartment" is way way too broad of a generalization. You give up space by living in a dense city but gain walkability and more public amenities, and on the other hand if you lived in the suburbs you would give that up for more personal space and - at least in the case of the US - better school districts. If you're rich you can have the plusses of all.
- thomastjeffery 4y ago
  Forest background? Hah. Living in an apartment is a compromise. Unfortunately, most apartments in the US do not have much to offer. Most are not well insulated, particularly for sound. The overwhelming majority are rentals; and most of those are managed by landlords who charge an arm and a leg, only to be less than helpful. Public transit relies on good apartments, and good apartments rely on public transit. It's symbiotic. The US has largely failed at providing both. People don't choose what is available in the market. They choose from what is available in the market.
  - angled 4y ago
    MTR Corp has a great model for this type of development. It would be great to see other governments partnering with them!
- throw0101c 4y ago
  > You live in an apartment and trade away personal space and still have to take a train to work where you get little personal space. You have a limited view of 'urban living'. Want a front yard, back yard, and garage (attached to a laneway)? Plenty of that was built pre-WW2, and there's no reason why it couldn't be again: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streetcar_suburb https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streetcar_suburb * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWsGBRdK2N0&t=1m8s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWsGBRdK2N0&t=1m8s The Oh the Urbanity channel has a video on the (misguided) idea that "urban living" = Manhattan / Hong Kong apartment blocks: * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BCmz-fgp24E https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BCmz-fgp24E Examples (Streetview) of urban tree-lined streets which can support transit and where cycling is practical (and where a car is an option versus a necessity): * https://www.google.com/maps/place/125+Hampton+Ave,+Toronto,+ON https://www.google.com/maps/place/125+Hampton+Ave,+Toronto,+... * https://www.google.com/maps/place/50+Geoffrey+St,+Toronto,+ON https://www.google.com/maps/place/50+Geoffrey+St,+Toronto,+O... * https://www.google.com/maps/place/70+Jackman+Ave+Toronto,+ON https://www.google.com/maps/place/70+Jackman+Ave+Toronto,+ON See also: * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cO6txCZpbsQ&t=9m28s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cO6txCZpbsQ&t=9m28s Fifteen minutes pedalling in one direction is downtown, fifteen minutes in the other is farm land.
- baq 4y ago
  Tokyo and Seul are poor cities full of people just longing for a house, right?
  - tropicalbeach 4y ago
    If you would travel to those places you would actually realize how depressing it actually is. They have some of the highest depression rates in the world. They overlfowing with people you can barely walk on sidewalks. Someone explain how that is peaceful and enjoyable to live in.
- Al-Khwarizmi 4y ago
  I live in an apartment in a city (not in the US). Walking distances from my home: Pharmacy - seconds (right in the next building) Bar - seconds Supermarket - 1 minute Bakery - 1 minute Greengrocer's - 1 minute Children's playground - 1 minute Beach - 1 minute (OK, not representative of every apartment dweller, I'm privileged) :) Stationery shop - 2 minutes Bookshop - 2 minutes Bank branch with ATM - 3 minutes Amazon locker - 3 minutes My son's school - 4 minutes High school - 4 minutes Health center - 6 minutes Park - 7 minutes Library - 7 minutes Theatre - 13 minutes Cinema - 15 minutes Commute - 3 minutes walk to bus stop, buses every 5 minutes, 15-minute trip Train station - 25 minutes For me, moving to a house where I would need a car or much longer walks for most of those things would be a huge downgrade in standard of living, not an upgrade. Sure, I would have more space. Not worth it at all.
  - maximus-decimus 4y ago
    What about not having to hear your neighbors? What about not having to worry about your neighbors hearing you? Maybe you like listening to loud music at night. Maybe you want a home theater. Maybe you want to play your piano/drum any time of the day. I think you're underestimating how nice it is to have space.
    - ericmay 4y ago
      Everything you are talking about exists at least as much in the suburbs and then add in the constant mowing, leaf blowing, and weed eating to it too. > I think you're underestimating how nice it is to have space. This isn’t a trade we need to make. You can have space and be able to walk to things if we just build right. Take the suburb you live in now. Pick 5 houses randomly and turn those into some of the things the OP mentioned. Now you have your space and walkability. Throw in an apartment and some variations of housing so young and old and people with various incomes can live there too and there you have it. Now we’ve reduce car usage so you aren’t driving 5 miles in a 2,000 lb machine to get a loaf of bread and you still get to keep your car and your space.
      - maximus-decimus 4y ago
alexchantavy 4y ago
> The majority of the people in the US want to live somewhere and get around in the least difficult method. Due to decades of policymaking, that happens to be houses and cars. I think this is well said. The other dimension is public schools since US school funding comes from property taxes so more expensive areas have more funding for their schools, which usually means a higher quality education.
- oerpli 4y ago
  This is well known to be wrong. I'm not sure why it's repeated so often.
  - alexchantavy 4y ago
    Got a link I can learn from?
    - nayuki 4y ago
      I can't speak for the US, but in Canada the city's budget is set first, then all the properties are appraised, then the property tax rate is determined. Expensive properties do not automatically increase the city's tax revenue. See: https://torontoist.com/2014/01/everything-you-ever-wanted-to-know-about-property-taxes/ https://torontoist.com/2014/01/everything-you-ever-wanted-to... , https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nrWry5i3TBU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nrWry5i3TBU
      - seanmcdirmid 4y ago
        This is how it is in Washington state. But each state and even localities can do it differently. For example, someone was complaining that Montana property taxes would go up if all houses appreciated the same in value, or down if they all depreciated, which I thought was weird.
      - alexchantavy 4y ago
        I guess there are two questions: 1. Does school funding come mostly from property taxes? The answer here in Seattle is yes having seen some breakdown chart in some government document a while back. 2. What determines the amount of property tax? Thanks for sharing that link about how in Canada the tax collection amount works backwards from a goal amount. My understanding is that in the US, your property tax is assessed annually and the person doing it presumably uses market comparables to determine the taxable price - I don’t know if they work backwards from a target, but that sounds odd to me.
kortilla 4y ago
> I'll counter this - the majority of the people in the US want to live somewhere and get around in the least difficult method No they don’t. People consistently give up better commutes for more space. > It's very nearsighted to think our model is the penultimate in structuring society. Plenty of people are happy, fulfilled, and productive living in apartments & townhouses while taking trains to work. 100% agree. But Americans want houses more than a public train ride. Figure out how to solve the issue of living in shoeboxes with people still getting space to have a personal garden, a wood shop, etc and you’ll be onto something.
- petre 4y ago
  Community gardens and wood shops? I get that Americans like their property private and would even guard it with a rifle, but it could be a solution.
  - tiedieconderoga 4y ago
    Many suburban churches and organizations run community gardens, but it's rare to see in cities because of how much space it requires. We have shared wood/etc shops, even in small towns. "Makerspace" is one common name for them. Major issues include: storage, tool quality/maintenance, limited hours, staffing, high cost, clashing personalities. In either case, you'd likely need to drive to get to them. Some apartment complexes have shared gyms, but most of my landlords have been pathologically worried about insurance risks. I'm not sure they would be eager to go along with installing a communal lathe. As for gardens, I once lived somewhere that had small tin beds on the roof, but the landlord rented them out for $300/mo each...there were people who paid to use them, but I thought it was a ridiculous ask for a couple sqft of soil.
    - yunwal 4y ago
      Makerspaces only work well when there’s a strong sense of community among the members. It’s all too easy to fall to tragedy of the commons - people not putting things back where they found them, cleaning up for themselves, etc. there’s only so much you can do with cameras and surveillance. Ultimately you need things like events that bring people together and help them learn from each other for people to see it any other way than “shitty version of a personal workspace”.
noman-land 4y ago
Just in case you might not be aware, "penultimate" means "second to last", not "ultimate".

ipaddr 4y ago

Why would someone prefer to live like ants? Moving from a large place with a forest backyard to a tiny apartment is a lower standard of living. You live in an apartment and trade away personal space and still have to take a train to work where you get little personal space. People can be happy in an apartment but most would trade that in for a house they could afford it.

Dylan16807 4y ago
> Why would someone prefer to live like ants? Why would someone prefer to live like a snail? > Moving from a large place with a forest backyard to a tiny apartment is a lower standard of living. You live in an apartment and trade away personal space and still have to take a train to work where you get little personal space. A house does not imply a large backyard. Suburbs are the bigger problem, and they don't usually have much forest. And apartments don't have to be tiny. If you're comparing against a house in a similar location, that buys a lot of apartment space.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
nayuki 4y ago
> prefer to live like ants Unnecessarily inflammatory wording. (Don't use the popular "shoebox" either.) > Moving from a large place with a forest backyard Most Americans live in suburban houses and over 90% of suburbs don't have a forest backyard. You're painting a sunny caricature. > tiny apartment Apartments come in a range of sizes, easily from 300 sq ft to 2000 sq ft. You get what you pay for. With houses, the minimum size is so large that many people have no choice but to overpay for space they don't need. > lower standard of living Being in proximity to people, shopping, and businesses, as well as having a shorter commute to work, contribute to a higher standard of living.
- tssva 4y ago
  > Being in proximity to people, shopping, and businesses, as well as having a shorter commute to work, contribute to a higher standard of living. I live in a suburb. I'm in proximity to people, shopping and businesses. In fact, I'm in closer proximity to shopping and businesses than most residential areas in the closest city. Most of the large employers in my area are also in the suburbs so, commuting would be even longer living in the city since it would involve taking public transportation or driving from the city to the suburbs. Even if I lived and worked in the city walking, taking a bus or the subway from residential areas to the employment centers would take longer than my 15-minute commute.
alexchantavy 4y ago
Eh, people can like different things. I think "most feel house > apartment" is way way too broad of a generalization. You give up space by living in a dense city but gain walkability and more public amenities, and on the other hand if you lived in the suburbs you would give that up for more personal space and - at least in the case of the US - better school districts. If you're rich you can have the plusses of all.
thomastjeffery 4y ago
Forest background? Hah. Living in an apartment is a compromise. Unfortunately, most apartments in the US do not have much to offer. Most are not well insulated, particularly for sound. The overwhelming majority are rentals; and most of those are managed by landlords who charge an arm and a leg, only to be less than helpful. Public transit relies on good apartments, and good apartments rely on public transit. It's symbiotic. The US has largely failed at providing both. People don't choose what is available in the market. They choose from what is available in the market.
- angled 4y ago
  MTR Corp has a great model for this type of development. It would be great to see other governments partnering with them!
throw0101c 4y ago
> You live in an apartment and trade away personal space and still have to take a train to work where you get little personal space. You have a limited view of 'urban living'. Want a front yard, back yard, and garage (attached to a laneway)? Plenty of that was built pre-WW2, and there's no reason why it couldn't be again: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streetcar_suburb https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streetcar_suburb * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWsGBRdK2N0&t=1m8s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWsGBRdK2N0&t=1m8s The Oh the Urbanity channel has a video on the (misguided) idea that "urban living" = Manhattan / Hong Kong apartment blocks: * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BCmz-fgp24E https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BCmz-fgp24E Examples (Streetview) of urban tree-lined streets which can support transit and where cycling is practical (and where a car is an option versus a necessity): * https://www.google.com/maps/place/125+Hampton+Ave,+Toronto,+ON https://www.google.com/maps/place/125+Hampton+Ave,+Toronto,+... * https://www.google.com/maps/place/50+Geoffrey+St,+Toronto,+ON https://www.google.com/maps/place/50+Geoffrey+St,+Toronto,+O... * https://www.google.com/maps/place/70+Jackman+Ave+Toronto,+ON https://www.google.com/maps/place/70+Jackman+Ave+Toronto,+ON See also: * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cO6txCZpbsQ&t=9m28s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cO6txCZpbsQ&t=9m28s Fifteen minutes pedalling in one direction is downtown, fifteen minutes in the other is farm land.
baq 4y ago
Tokyo and Seul are poor cities full of people just longing for a house, right?
- tropicalbeach 4y ago
  If you would travel to those places you would actually realize how depressing it actually is. They have some of the highest depression rates in the world. They overlfowing with people you can barely walk on sidewalks. Someone explain how that is peaceful and enjoyable to live in.
Al-Khwarizmi 4y ago
I live in an apartment in a city (not in the US). Walking distances from my home: Pharmacy - seconds (right in the next building) Bar - seconds Supermarket - 1 minute Bakery - 1 minute Greengrocer's - 1 minute Children's playground - 1 minute Beach - 1 minute (OK, not representative of every apartment dweller, I'm privileged) :) Stationery shop - 2 minutes Bookshop - 2 minutes Bank branch with ATM - 3 minutes Amazon locker - 3 minutes My son's school - 4 minutes High school - 4 minutes Health center - 6 minutes Park - 7 minutes Library - 7 minutes Theatre - 13 minutes Cinema - 15 minutes Commute - 3 minutes walk to bus stop, buses every 5 minutes, 15-minute trip Train station - 25 minutes For me, moving to a house where I would need a car or much longer walks for most of those things would be a huge downgrade in standard of living, not an upgrade. Sure, I would have more space. Not worth it at all.
- maximus-decimus 4y ago
  What about not having to hear your neighbors? What about not having to worry about your neighbors hearing you? Maybe you like listening to loud music at night. Maybe you want a home theater. Maybe you want to play your piano/drum any time of the day. I think you're underestimating how nice it is to have space.
  - ericmay 4y ago
    Everything you are talking about exists at least as much in the suburbs and then add in the constant mowing, leaf blowing, and weed eating to it too. > I think you're underestimating how nice it is to have space. This isn’t a trade we need to make. You can have space and be able to walk to things if we just build right. Take the suburb you live in now. Pick 5 houses randomly and turn those into some of the things the OP mentioned. Now you have your space and walkability. Throw in an apartment and some variations of housing so young and old and people with various incomes can live there too and there you have it. Now we’ve reduce car usage so you aren’t driving 5 miles in a 2,000 lb machine to get a loaf of bread and you still get to keep your car and your space.
    - maximus-decimus 4y ago

alexchantavy 4y ago

> The majority of the people in the US want to live somewhere and get around in the least difficult method. Due to decades of policymaking, that happens to be houses and cars. I think this is well said. The other dimension is public schools since US school funding comes from property taxes so more expensive areas have more funding for their schools, which usually means a higher quality education.

oerpli 4y ago
This is well known to be wrong. I'm not sure why it's repeated so often.
- alexchantavy 4y ago
  Got a link I can learn from?
  - nayuki 4y ago
    I can't speak for the US, but in Canada the city's budget is set first, then all the properties are appraised, then the property tax rate is determined. Expensive properties do not automatically increase the city's tax revenue. See: https://torontoist.com/2014/01/everything-you-ever-wanted-to-know-about-property-taxes/ https://torontoist.com/2014/01/everything-you-ever-wanted-to... , https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nrWry5i3TBU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nrWry5i3TBU
    - seanmcdirmid 4y ago
      This is how it is in Washington state. But each state and even localities can do it differently. For example, someone was complaining that Montana property taxes would go up if all houses appreciated the same in value, or down if they all depreciated, which I thought was weird.
    - alexchantavy 4y ago
      I guess there are two questions: 1. Does school funding come mostly from property taxes? The answer here in Seattle is yes having seen some breakdown chart in some government document a while back. 2. What determines the amount of property tax? Thanks for sharing that link about how in Canada the tax collection amount works backwards from a goal amount. My understanding is that in the US, your property tax is assessed annually and the person doing it presumably uses market comparables to determine the taxable price - I don’t know if they work backwards from a target, but that sounds odd to me.

kortilla 4y ago

> I'll counter this - the majority of the people in the US want to live somewhere and get around in the least difficult method No they don’t. People consistently give up better commutes for more space. > It's very nearsighted to think our model is the penultimate in structuring society. Plenty of people are happy, fulfilled, and productive living in apartments & townhouses while taking trains to work. 100% agree. But Americans want houses more than a public train ride. Figure out how to solve the issue of living in shoeboxes with people still getting space to have a personal garden, a wood shop, etc and you’ll be onto something.

petre 4y ago
Community gardens and wood shops? I get that Americans like their property private and would even guard it with a rifle, but it could be a solution.
- tiedieconderoga 4y ago
  Many suburban churches and organizations run community gardens, but it's rare to see in cities because of how much space it requires. We have shared wood/etc shops, even in small towns. "Makerspace" is one common name for them. Major issues include: storage, tool quality/maintenance, limited hours, staffing, high cost, clashing personalities. In either case, you'd likely need to drive to get to them. Some apartment complexes have shared gyms, but most of my landlords have been pathologically worried about insurance risks. I'm not sure they would be eager to go along with installing a communal lathe. As for gardens, I once lived somewhere that had small tin beds on the roof, but the landlord rented them out for $300/mo each...there were people who paid to use them, but I thought it was a ridiculous ask for a couple sqft of soil.
  - yunwal 4y ago
    Makerspaces only work well when there’s a strong sense of community among the members. It’s all too easy to fall to tragedy of the commons - people not putting things back where they found them, cleaning up for themselves, etc. there’s only so much you can do with cameras and surveillance. Ultimately you need things like events that bring people together and help them learn from each other for people to see it any other way than “shitty version of a personal workspace”.

noman-land 4y ago

Just in case you might not be aware, "penultimate" means "second to last", not "ultimate".