3 ms·

If humans are the scourge of the planet then it's difficult to see why population density is of value. There must be something else at play. Density simply impr

If humans are the scourge of the planet then it's difficult to see why population density is of value. There must be something else at play. Density simply improves the availability of goods and services. Some of the more snide ( myself included ) might accuse those "liberals" of simply preferring a wider variety of restaurants - sort of the Anthony Bourdain school of liberalism :) Suburbs are a compromise with positional land rents ala Ricardo/Henry George. People who want to make more humans will probably always head there. While I can more or less understand the distaste for automobiles, I doubt they're going anywhere. And it might even be possible to have suburbs as an artifact of public transport - Bourdain did a show on The Bronx, which according to his show ends at a relatively rural setting. I get more than enough "culture" through my cable wire in the form of cable TV and Internet. That includes Anthony Bourdain :) As a practitioner of live music since Carter was president, pardon my cynicism w.r.t. "culture".

hsitz 12y ago
"If humans are the scourge of the planet then it's difficult to see why population density is of value. . . . Density simply improves the availability of goods and services." I don't follow. Density does not merely improve _availability_ of goods and services. It improves the efficiency of providing those goods and services (besides other efficiencies). So to me it seems that density is of value, and that applies whether or not humans are the scourge of the planet. Using resources efficiently = Good. Wasting resources = Bad. On another note, I would add that getting all your culture from the internet and tv is probably not the best thing. The cocoon of your car separates you from having to experience street/neighborhood culture firsthand. Not a good thing in my book. Far easier to detach yourself from people you see on tv than people you walk by on the street.
- ArkyBeagle 12y ago
  Two weeks later... Density does not necessarily improve efficiency. It makes for a wider variety of ...restaurants. I might have agreed with "efficiency" before the logistics revolution of the last thirty years. If there had been actual efficiency then there would never have been suburbs in the first place. Suburbs were a (perhaps cheap) trick of finance, but ... there they are. Suburbs are a triumph of land rents avoidance. I have plenty of exposure to "street" culture. It's hugely overrated. The term "tinpot" comes to mind - remember "Billie Joe Must Die"? That's an extreme case, but... You used to be able to go into the Five Spot and hear Ornette Coleman, or catch Buddy Emmons jamming at one of the downtown Nashville bars. Not so much any more. Converting that to mass market is the real test. I did a hugely unscientific and completely informal test when I was living in a downtown space - "Why do you like it here?" When we culled the things they said they liked ( museums, theater, live music ) but didn't actually do, it came down to ... bars. Or restaurants, once you don't want to be seen as a reprobate any more. (Cable) TV is a much better resource than it's given credit for ( BookTv is great ) - but you have to be picky. The internet? Mixed at best. Books are the best, but they don't make 'em like they used to.

hsitz 12y ago

"If humans are the scourge of the planet then it's difficult to see why population density is of value. . . . Density simply improves the availability of goods and services." I don't follow. Density does not merely improve _availability_ of goods and services. It improves the efficiency of providing those goods and services (besides other efficiencies). So to me it seems that density is of value, and that applies whether or not humans are the scourge of the planet. Using resources efficiently = Good. Wasting resources = Bad. On another note, I would add that getting all your culture from the internet and tv is probably not the best thing. The cocoon of your car separates you from having to experience street/neighborhood culture firsthand. Not a good thing in my book. Far easier to detach yourself from people you see on tv than people you walk by on the street.

ArkyBeagle 12y ago
Two weeks later... Density does not necessarily improve efficiency. It makes for a wider variety of ...restaurants. I might have agreed with "efficiency" before the logistics revolution of the last thirty years. If there had been actual efficiency then there would never have been suburbs in the first place. Suburbs were a (perhaps cheap) trick of finance, but ... there they are. Suburbs are a triumph of land rents avoidance. I have plenty of exposure to "street" culture. It's hugely overrated. The term "tinpot" comes to mind - remember "Billie Joe Must Die"? That's an extreme case, but... You used to be able to go into the Five Spot and hear Ornette Coleman, or catch Buddy Emmons jamming at one of the downtown Nashville bars. Not so much any more. Converting that to mass market is the real test. I did a hugely unscientific and completely informal test when I was living in a downtown space - "Why do you like it here?" When we culled the things they said they liked ( museums, theater, live music ) but didn't actually do, it came down to ... bars. Or restaurants, once you don't want to be seen as a reprobate any more. (Cable) TV is a much better resource than it's given credit for ( BookTv is great ) - but you have to be picky. The internet? Mixed at best. Books are the best, but they don't make 'em like they used to.