3 ms·

> No, because people fundamentally don't want to do this. This is untrue, because > The plan exists now. Downsize your lifestyle drastically and move closer

> No, because people fundamentally don't want to do this. This is untrue, because > The plan exists now. Downsize your lifestyle drastically and move closer to the downtown of a major-ish city. this is untrue. The problem isn't a lack of alternatives, the problem is the auto industry lobbying to make alternatives illegal and spending billions to make people believe alternatives don't exist. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streetcar_suburb https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streetcar_suburb

ericmay 4y ago
Yea - also idk why people keep thinking you need to downsize your lifestyle drastically or at all. I live in a decent-sized metro area in a 2500 square foot detached home in an urban neighborhood. It's perfectly normal and fine. People have cars, but they also walk and bike to a lot of places. There are restaurants and shops nearby to walk to. There are lots of young parents with kids and a school nearby too. Unfortunately people equate good urban planning with this weird dystopian view of a 400sqft apartment and clothes hung out to dry and getting stabbed to death on the street instead of how Americans built in the late 1800s and early 1900s with small businesses, restaurants nearby, parks for everyone to enjoy getting out and gettin some sunshine, and other amenities. "But it's expensive" - yes because we are market-locked into building nothing like this so scarcity drives up the prices.
- paulcole 4y ago
  > this weird dystopian view of a 400sqft apartment and clothes hung out to dry This is only dystopian if this is how you view it. I live in a 600 square foot apartment and hang my clothes out to dry. The sun is free! A 2500’ square foot house is much more dystopian to me personally.
  - ericmay 4y ago
    I’ve lived in both. Both are fine and serve different communities and different people at different points in their lives. Ideally these different size dwellings are mixed in to the same neighborhood. I didn’t mean to suggest one is bad (though I think skyscrapers are an anti-pattern as well just less harmful) - just that some Americans will paint any attempts at meaningful urbanization as Hong Kong as opposed to their current size home when the reality is there isn’t a size trade off that needs to be made you just need to do more with how the suburban neighborhood is built/zoned out.
paulcole 4y ago
This is exactly what I’m talking about. Blame the auto industry. Blame whoever. But the plan to live a walkable lifestyle exists. It’s just that people don’t want a walkable lifestyle as much as they say they do or they’d find a way to make it happen.
- digging 4y ago
  > But the plan to live a walkable lifestyle exists. It’s just that people don’t want a walkable lifestyle as much as they say they do or they’d find a way to make it happen. My dude, it is illegal in almost all of the USA. Besides that, you missed the point about how most people don't know it's an option because they've never seen anything else. I also think you're a bit confused about the power that individuals have to determine the makeup of their neighborhood. Walkable neighborhoods are expensive because they are highly desirable and rare.

ericmay 4y ago

Yea - also idk why people keep thinking you need to downsize your lifestyle drastically or at all. I live in a decent-sized metro area in a 2500 square foot detached home in an urban neighborhood. It's perfectly normal and fine. People have cars, but they also walk and bike to a lot of places. There are restaurants and shops nearby to walk to. There are lots of young parents with kids and a school nearby too. Unfortunately people equate good urban planning with this weird dystopian view of a 400sqft apartment and clothes hung out to dry and getting stabbed to death on the street instead of how Americans built in the late 1800s and early 1900s with small businesses, restaurants nearby, parks for everyone to enjoy getting out and gettin some sunshine, and other amenities. "But it's expensive" - yes because we are market-locked into building nothing like this so scarcity drives up the prices.

paulcole 4y ago
> this weird dystopian view of a 400sqft apartment and clothes hung out to dry This is only dystopian if this is how you view it. I live in a 600 square foot apartment and hang my clothes out to dry. The sun is free! A 2500’ square foot house is much more dystopian to me personally.
- ericmay 4y ago
  I’ve lived in both. Both are fine and serve different communities and different people at different points in their lives. Ideally these different size dwellings are mixed in to the same neighborhood. I didn’t mean to suggest one is bad (though I think skyscrapers are an anti-pattern as well just less harmful) - just that some Americans will paint any attempts at meaningful urbanization as Hong Kong as opposed to their current size home when the reality is there isn’t a size trade off that needs to be made you just need to do more with how the suburban neighborhood is built/zoned out.

paulcole 4y ago

This is exactly what I’m talking about. Blame the auto industry. Blame whoever. But the plan to live a walkable lifestyle exists. It’s just that people don’t want a walkable lifestyle as much as they say they do or they’d find a way to make it happen.

digging 4y ago
> But the plan to live a walkable lifestyle exists. It’s just that people don’t want a walkable lifestyle as much as they say they do or they’d find a way to make it happen. My dude, it is illegal in almost all of the USA. Besides that, you missed the point about how most people don't know it's an option because they've never seen anything else. I also think you're a bit confused about the power that individuals have to determine the makeup of their neighborhood. Walkable neighborhoods are expensive because they are highly desirable and rare.