7 ms·

These suburbia homes are still pretty bad deal for the public. Lots of infrastructure cost come with them like car infrastructure etc.

AlgorithmicTime 3y ago
[dead]
some_random 3y ago
As a society, we've decided that we want lots of infrastructure including car infrastructure.
- dartos 3y ago
  Yknow, in the US, I think it was more auto industry lobbying in the 20th century that led us to the whole “stroads” situation we have. People didn’t like having 3 lane roads right in their path to walk to the grocery store. The municipal solution was to ensure everyone needed to drive everywhere.
  - some_random 3y ago
    The car infrastructure you were referring to is more than just stroads and mandatory vehicle ownership. I know that's all your favorite youtubers talk about, but there are actually other aspects.
    - dartos 3y ago
      Hey friend, how about instead of writing a comment that does nothing but sound condescending, you add something to the discussion. What “more” are you talking about? I’m very interested in this.
      - some_random 3y ago
        Yeah absolutely, here's some reading to get you started! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Types_of_road https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Types_of_road
        dartos 3y ago
        Oh you literally meant that there’s more types of roads. Ok… thanks I guess.
  - rickydroll 3y ago
    I highly recommend everyone interested in local land use to attend planning board meetings regularly. Observe the work your planning board is doing, and if you don't like it, find some way to volunteer or actually be part of the planning board. This is the only way to make these changes at the local level.
    - jklinger410 3y ago
      This is why I'm convinced the biggest problem with the 40 hour work week and the capitalist perspective of the American system is actually the lack of time and added stress the system relies on to function. People simply do not want to engage because they either literally don't have time, or are taking that time to prepare for their next shift. An idle society, somewhat more like what the French have (as one example), can be seen as in constant cycles of rebellion. This is the way it should be done. I won't make value judgement on human beings, I will just judge the systems that they must function inside of. And a system that deprives you of time and relaxation is a way to subvert democracy on a very basic level. If we were to repair this issue in the US, it would likely take generations to accomplish.
- jklinger410 3y ago
  Did we decide that in a vacuum? Like by some kind of super informed vote? Or did a system designed to maximize profits hide the downside, promote the upsides, and convince us to do it, to their financial benefit? And now that it is the norm, are people defending it because they actually agree, or are they just afraid of change and too weak to fight it now that it is normal? I notice bad ideas usually die with a few defenders, whose arguments can be summed up with "it just works for me" in the face of all evidence. Suburbs seem to be one of those concepts.
  - midasuni 3y ago
    Nobody in the suburbs seems to be trying to fight it, it’s people who like the high density living and want others to do so too. People can choose now, some like suburban life, some like city life. Maybe this is influenced by media (not many shows with young 20 year olds in suburbia, or families in the city. It’s typically teens - suburbs, 20s singles city, parents suburbs, empty nesters skew more city again. But maybe that reflects what people like.
davemp 3y ago
It's only a bad deal if you ignore what a significant portion of the population prefers and value space lowly. There's more to life than optimal efficiency.
- eru 3y ago
  Please read carefully: 'These suburbia homes are still pretty bad deal for the public.' The original comment was carefully worded to avoid any statement about whether suburbia was a good or bad deal for the people who want to live there. Similarly to how protectionism and subsidies can be a good deal for those people who benefit from them, but still be a bad deal for the public.
  - lucioperca 3y ago
    Yes, cost for infrastructure like sewer, water, electricity is much more expensive for low density city parts compared to dense ones. But this is not reflected on the billing. Apart from the needed streets there is a lot other cost like health care which comes with car centered living.
bluGill 3y ago
That infrastructure is amortized over many years and so it is pretty cheap. Every time I look I discover the dense cities where you would think costs are lower end up having higher tax rates. Remember the original streetcar suburbs were built before electric, water/sewer and other services, they have all added that infrastructure over the years and replaced their roads many times. Sure transit is cheaper than roads (and suburb costs don't count the cost of a car, while transit counts those costs), but roads are not that expensive over the lifetime.
bluescrn 3y ago
Yes, if we all lived in city-centre 'WFH pods' eating bug paste we could get infrastructure costs and environmental impact way down! Then we could breed more humans, and 'growth' continues! (for some definitions of 'growth') But while some (young) people are fine with super-dense urban living, not needing a car, and rarely leaving their city, many people place a very high value on space, peace+quiet, and the increased freedom to travel that cars offer.
- the_gastropod 3y ago
  Interestingly, I’m not particularly young (approaching 40), and can’t stand living in the suburbs (where I moved, from a city, last year). I feel so completely trapped, unfree, and dependent on my car, it’s ridiculous. I’ll be eating a $40k+ loss on this house purchase to move back asap, and it will be worth it. I find the ability to walk to my library or grocery store infinitely more freeing than having to buckle in to my car and drive to my destination. I like being able to hop on my bicycle and get out of the city, without having to navigate suburban style 45mph stroads. I like the actual peace and quiet as opposed to the leaf blower brigade firing up at 7am. This suburban lifestyle ain’t for me.
  - midasuni 3y ago
    So what you’re saying is you are against seatbelt laws…
    - readthenotes1 3y ago
      Don't have cars, don't need seatbelts;)
  - jjav 3y ago
    I enjoy walking to the library and grocery stores (and many other things), that's why I live in a suburb which has all these amenities within an easy walk. > I like being able to hop on my bicycle and get out of the city You find it safer to bike in NYC or SF than in a quiet low-traffic suburb? I did spend a lot of time biking in Manhattan in my youth but I wouldn't call it safe. Much safer cycling these days in the suburbs with low traffic.
networkchad 3y ago
[dead]

AlgorithmicTime 3y ago

[dead]

some_random 3y ago

As a society, we've decided that we want lots of infrastructure including car infrastructure.

dartos 3y ago
Yknow, in the US, I think it was more auto industry lobbying in the 20th century that led us to the whole “stroads” situation we have. People didn’t like having 3 lane roads right in their path to walk to the grocery store. The municipal solution was to ensure everyone needed to drive everywhere.
- some_random 3y ago
  The car infrastructure you were referring to is more than just stroads and mandatory vehicle ownership. I know that's all your favorite youtubers talk about, but there are actually other aspects.
  - dartos 3y ago
    Hey friend, how about instead of writing a comment that does nothing but sound condescending, you add something to the discussion. What “more” are you talking about? I’m very interested in this.
    - some_random 3y ago
      Yeah absolutely, here's some reading to get you started! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Types_of_road https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Types_of_road
      - dartos 3y ago
        Oh you literally meant that there’s more types of roads. Ok… thanks I guess.
- rickydroll 3y ago
  I highly recommend everyone interested in local land use to attend planning board meetings regularly. Observe the work your planning board is doing, and if you don't like it, find some way to volunteer or actually be part of the planning board. This is the only way to make these changes at the local level.
  - jklinger410 3y ago
    This is why I'm convinced the biggest problem with the 40 hour work week and the capitalist perspective of the American system is actually the lack of time and added stress the system relies on to function. People simply do not want to engage because they either literally don't have time, or are taking that time to prepare for their next shift. An idle society, somewhat more like what the French have (as one example), can be seen as in constant cycles of rebellion. This is the way it should be done. I won't make value judgement on human beings, I will just judge the systems that they must function inside of. And a system that deprives you of time and relaxation is a way to subvert democracy on a very basic level. If we were to repair this issue in the US, it would likely take generations to accomplish.
jklinger410 3y ago
Did we decide that in a vacuum? Like by some kind of super informed vote? Or did a system designed to maximize profits hide the downside, promote the upsides, and convince us to do it, to their financial benefit? And now that it is the norm, are people defending it because they actually agree, or are they just afraid of change and too weak to fight it now that it is normal? I notice bad ideas usually die with a few defenders, whose arguments can be summed up with "it just works for me" in the face of all evidence. Suburbs seem to be one of those concepts.
- midasuni 3y ago
  Nobody in the suburbs seems to be trying to fight it, it’s people who like the high density living and want others to do so too. People can choose now, some like suburban life, some like city life. Maybe this is influenced by media (not many shows with young 20 year olds in suburbia, or families in the city. It’s typically teens - suburbs, 20s singles city, parents suburbs, empty nesters skew more city again. But maybe that reflects what people like.

davemp 3y ago

It's only a bad deal if you ignore what a significant portion of the population prefers and value space lowly. There's more to life than optimal efficiency.

eru 3y ago
Please read carefully: 'These suburbia homes are still pretty bad deal for the public.' The original comment was carefully worded to avoid any statement about whether suburbia was a good or bad deal for the people who want to live there. Similarly to how protectionism and subsidies can be a good deal for those people who benefit from them, but still be a bad deal for the public.
- lucioperca 3y ago
  Yes, cost for infrastructure like sewer, water, electricity is much more expensive for low density city parts compared to dense ones. But this is not reflected on the billing. Apart from the needed streets there is a lot other cost like health care which comes with car centered living.

bluGill 3y ago

That infrastructure is amortized over many years and so it is pretty cheap. Every time I look I discover the dense cities where you would think costs are lower end up having higher tax rates. Remember the original streetcar suburbs were built before electric, water/sewer and other services, they have all added that infrastructure over the years and replaced their roads many times. Sure transit is cheaper than roads (and suburb costs don't count the cost of a car, while transit counts those costs), but roads are not that expensive over the lifetime.

bluescrn 3y ago

Yes, if we all lived in city-centre 'WFH pods' eating bug paste we could get infrastructure costs and environmental impact way down! Then we could breed more humans, and 'growth' continues! (for some definitions of 'growth') But while some (young) people are fine with super-dense urban living, not needing a car, and rarely leaving their city, many people place a very high value on space, peace+quiet, and the increased freedom to travel that cars offer.

the_gastropod 3y ago
Interestingly, I’m not particularly young (approaching 40), and can’t stand living in the suburbs (where I moved, from a city, last year). I feel so completely trapped, unfree, and dependent on my car, it’s ridiculous. I’ll be eating a $40k+ loss on this house purchase to move back asap, and it will be worth it. I find the ability to walk to my library or grocery store infinitely more freeing than having to buckle in to my car and drive to my destination. I like being able to hop on my bicycle and get out of the city, without having to navigate suburban style 45mph stroads. I like the actual peace and quiet as opposed to the leaf blower brigade firing up at 7am. This suburban lifestyle ain’t for me.
- midasuni 3y ago
  So what you’re saying is you are against seatbelt laws…
  - readthenotes1 3y ago
    Don't have cars, don't need seatbelts;)
- jjav 3y ago
  I enjoy walking to the library and grocery stores (and many other things), that's why I live in a suburb which has all these amenities within an easy walk. > I like being able to hop on my bicycle and get out of the city You find it safer to bike in NYC or SF than in a quiet low-traffic suburb? I did spend a lot of time biking in Manhattan in my youth but I wouldn't call it safe. Much safer cycling these days in the suburbs with low traffic.

networkchad 3y ago

[dead]