4 ms·
Yes, but the houses farther out are affordable because they lack those amenities. The same narrative plays out over and over again. "I can't afford a house wit
by jf22 3y ago
Yes, but the houses farther out are affordable because they lack those amenities.
The same narrative plays out over and over again. "I can't afford a house with an easy drive to a supermarket and library, and I want to be carless."
Well yeah, so does everybody else, which is why that type of housing is expensive.
- eropple 3y agoYes, of course! And it's reasonable to think that living in both modest precarity and isolation is worse than living in somewhat more severe precarity; "affordable" places to live are inferior goods! The problem, fundamentally, is that we, collectively and as a country, need to create more good places, rather than to exile people to the bad but affordable ones. We need a concerted effort to have strong towns and to put cars at the edge and not the center of those towns in order to have a healthy community future, and just sneering that you can buy a house in the hinterlands is both non-responsive and cruel to boot.
- jf22 3y agoI agree with you. However, the discussion about housing is normally around how it's worse now than it was in the past, and these types of dynamics have existed for a long time.
- eropple 3y agoIt absolutely is worse than it has been in the "good places", though. Because we have more people, but not more good places.