3 ms·

I guess you ignore the last 20,000 years of humanity. Yes, maybe it wasn't cities where people lived; but it was small towns, villages, or caves. Humans have l

by ardit33 18y ago

I guess you ignore the last 20,000 years of humanity. Yes, maybe it wasn't cities where people lived; but it was small towns, villages, or caves. Humans have lived bunched up close together in groups for millenia. This isolation that the suburbs inflicts on us is just un-natural. There was a great story in Discovery channel, on how immigrants from Germany, that moved in the USA mid-west, suffered heavily from depression. People were used living in towns and villages, close to family, friends, and support. Now, a lot of these german families, bought a lot of land in the middle of rural midwest, where everything was miles (and hours) of walk to the next house or town. People felt isolated, and women suffered the most. In europe, houses are usually in hills, grouped together, with a town/village center, and the farmed land is outside the town.

gravitycop 18y ago
In europe, houses are usually in hills, grouped together, with a town/village center, and the farmed land is outside the town. And there are/were no farmers? U.S. urban population share, 1800-2000: http://www.demographia.com/db-usrur1800.htm http://www.demographia.com/db-usrur1800.htm 1800 6.1% 1850 15.3% 1900 39.7% 1950 59.0% 2000 79.0% http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/eib3/eib3.htm http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/eib3/eib3.htm Early 20th century agriculture was labor intensive, and it took place on a large number of small, diversified farms in rural areas where more than half of the U.S. population lived. These farms employed close to half of the U.S. workforce
mhartl 18y ago
I don't ignore the last 20,000 years, but (for the most part) our genes do. So my argument about cities is basically sound. (See, e.g., http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2009/01/04/how_the_city_hurts_your_brain/. http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2009/01/04/...) You might be right about suburbia, though; it can be quite isolating. N.B. I say this only because I myself misspelled it for years (right up until around 2000): "millennia" has double-ell, double-en. Since making this discovery, I've found that "millenni(um|a)" is misspelled ~20% of the time---and the present occurrence makes two just today!

by ardit33 18y ago

gravitycop 18y ago

In europe, houses are usually in hills, grouped together, with a town/village center, and the farmed land is outside the town. And there are/were no farmers? U.S. urban population share, 1800-2000: http://www.demographia.com/db-usrur1800.htm http://www.demographia.com/db-usrur1800.htm 1800 6.1% 1850 15.3% 1900 39.7% 1950 59.0% 2000 79.0% http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/eib3/eib3.htm http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/eib3/eib3.htm Early 20th century agriculture was labor intensive, and it took place on a large number of small, diversified farms in rural areas where more than half of the U.S. population lived. These farms employed close to half of the U.S. workforce

mhartl 18y ago

I don't ignore the last 20,000 years, but (for the most part) our genes do. So my argument about cities is basically sound. (See, e.g., http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2009/01/04/how_the_city_hurts_your_brain/. http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2009/01/04/...) You might be right about suburbia, though; it can be quite isolating. N.B. I say this only because I myself misspelled it for years (right up until around 2000): "millennia" has double-ell, double-en. Since making this discovery, I've found that "millenni(um|a)" is misspelled ~20% of the time---and the present occurrence makes two just today!