While that might be expedient and help people that want to live in sprawl, long-term, you are just letting the more popular areas become playgrounds for rich people as everyone else gets priced out (due to the restricted supply in the popular places driving prices to the moon), and you're going to run into the huge problem that property taxes do a poor job of covering infrastructure for sprawl.
Why? If something is legal, which is harmful, vote for politicians who are going to change the laws for the better. I thought it was how democracy works.
What is it you're saying here? If we need more housing it has to be built, if there isn't any dirt available in the city center you have to move out or up. The space is finite. Around here they always move out because land is cheap, and infrastructure is available and well maintained. A lot of the people moving here are from Memphis.
The way you worded the statement made it sound as though government had to specifically approve the activity. My mistake.
If only we had the technology to build in the vertical dimension. Alas...
I venture to say that Greenman has never lived in NYC. Can't force a square peg into a round hole.
They are organic if the housing grows slowly. Like there's villages around here that every decade someone slaps a few new houses around the edge. That works well.
I wonder how these happiness indices are impacted by how much people rot their brains on social media. Plenty of people are just completely steeped to a degree that they are just constantly miserable, thanks to voices that tell us we need to be miserable and a flattening of economic perceptions such that we get miserable when we also can't have X like the guy that looks like Everyday Joe on Facebook.
lol anyone saying good restaurants are everywhere has probably never been to a good restaurant because they most certainly are not.
worldhappiness.report
It's just hard for me to imagine any large city as being "happy". Obviously there are people that enjoy it, but I can't understand why.
And city people might not understand why people living in the middle of nowhere enjoy that.
Imagine that - different people like different things and prioritize different things in their daily living.
Why? Is it not based on discrimination? Would you not prefer a warm spring day after a refreshing rain over a 120 degree desert. How about a middle class home over an apartment with a homeless person sleeping on cardboard bed outside the front door? What if human beings are genetically suited to feel being joy in certain conditions over others. Take arctic hysteria as an example. What is more likely, that people are more genetically evolved to feel good in a natural setting or in a cement jungle, never mind the fine restaurants. A lot of people free from financial dependency build estates that duplicate a garden setting. Bonsai remind me a lot of the African savanna. And so on…
I think if you’re going to present the choice you should present it more holistically. Sure people generally want a bigger house all else being equal but the whole point is all else isn’t equal.
Facebook
Twitter