Why do so much people hate on the Suburbs?? (metro, suburban, highway)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I understand what you are saying. I should have stated that all cities are not equal in terms of public transportation or density levels. Northern and Western cities in my experience have better public transportation and more concentrated populations. I live near Miami (when not at school) at it is pretty bad in my opinion in terms of ease of getting around. Its too bad because there are a lot of cool places to go.
I completely agree with your opinion on the suburbs. Many of the ones I have lived in are very auto centric and tough to get around. They also tend not to have a great nightlife for younger people. Basically I find them to be really inefficient. I was reading somewhere that good public transportation systems can spur a lot of economic activity. I think more efficient suburbs could be great.
An efficient suburb would be a great idea. And you're right, not all cities are on equal terms when it comes to public transportation. Metropolitan Atlanta is a sad example of this. Back in the 1970s, MARTA was getting started. Cobb County Gwinnett County, and Clayton County all voted against MARTA. There were racial elements in this. Many people who were going to the suburbs didn't want Blacks from Atlanta going to the suburbs. The irony is that today, Blacks make up a majority in Clayton County. Cobb County and Gwinnett County are diverse counties today. Those counties started their own bus systems. Clayton County's bus system went belly up though. Where I live, Paulding County, has maybe one bus route, and it's an express route. You can't get to it without a car. Paulding County is basically inaccessible without a car.
Atlanta metro would be great if there were more efficient suburbs, like those in DeKalb County. However, this is my theory of why it hasn't happened. The idea is that people went to the suburbs to get away from the city and to get away from "efficiency". I also think this goes with what some people feel the south should be, slow-paced.
An efficient suburb would be a great idea. And you're right, not all cities are on equal terms when it comes to public transportation. Metropolitan Atlanta is a sad example of this. Back in the 1970s, MARTA was getting started. Cobb County Gwinnett County, and Clayton County all voted against MARTA. There were racial elements in this. Many people who were going to the suburbs didn't want Blacks from Atlanta going to the suburbs. The irony is that today, Blacks make up a majority in Clayton County. Cobb County and Gwinnett County are diverse counties today. Those counties started their own bus systems. Clayton County's bus system went belly up though. Where I live, Paulding County, has maybe one bus route, and it's an express route. You can't get to it without a car. Paulding County is basically inaccessible without a car.
Atlanta metro would be great if there were more efficient suburbs, like those in DeKalb County. However, this is my theory of why it hasn't happened. The idea is that people went to the suburbs to get away from the city and to get away from "efficiency". I also think this goes with what some people feel the south should be, slow-paced.
I understand. Plus, the south industrialized later and much slower than the north. Even today it is much more agrarian than the north. Part of it could very well be politics. Building an effective public transportation system, and making suburbs more efficient costs a lot of money, and many of these southern states have leaders who dont want to spend regardless of the circumstances. Granted it is a bad economy and I can understand the hesitance and every state has a different financial situation., but I still think it is a worthwhile goal.
IMO you simply have a lower quality of life when you live in the suburbs. Sure it seems "nice" that you have a big yard and "personal space" and all that, but if you look at it objectively:
-You have a lower level of health because you rarely exercise - you never walk anywhere, you always drive.
-You have less money to spend because it costs more to driver everywhere, since driving is expensive
-You have less to do, because everything is so spread out, so organizations rarely hold big events nearby.
Compared to a city where:
-You generally exercise more since lots of things are within walking distance, so you walk to them
-You have more money, since you aren't constantly throwing it into your gas tank
-You have more to do - festivals and big events are always nearby
This is interesting. Im not quite sure if I agree with your claim on health, but I understand your reasoning. Overall, I definitely agree your quality of life may be lower. Then again it is pretty subjective. Having a big backyard is probably pretty cool for some, but for me it is just not important. Id much rather take the trade-off of not having a yard because I live in an area with such a great variety of things to do. Plus cities often have pretty decent parks.
I definitely agree with saving money by not having a car. I visited Chicago and Boston recently and got around no problem, with less stress and for less money, than I would in the suburbs.
My two friends in Chicago dont have cars their and they say it is way less of a hassle.
Oooh. I do love posts filled with generalizations and stereotypes!
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoulesMSU
IMO you simply have a lower quality of life when you live in the suburbs.
Wrong. You may perceive a lower quality of life for you in the suburbs, but that does not apply to everyone.
Quote:
Sure it seems "nice" that you have a big yard and "personal space" and all that, but if you look at it objectively:
Ob ... what?? Nothing about your post is objective. Nice try.
Quote:
-You have a lower level of health because you rarely exercise - you never walk anywhere, you always drive.
I exercise every day by walking around my suburban neighborhood in the mornings, and by walking to nearby stores after work and on weekends. Just yesterday I walked to a thrift store, the produce market, the drug store, and then stopped at a restaurant to pick up a yummy chef's salad.
Quote:
-You have less money to spend because it costs more to driver everywhere, since driving is expensive
Except that I don't "driver everywhere". Auto insurance is much more expensive in the city, as is the price per gallon of gasoline.
Quote:
-You have less to do, because everything is so spread out, so organizations rarely hold big events nearby.
I have plenty to do -- friends, church, recreation, civic events -- but thanks for being so concerned.
Quote:
-You generally exercise more since lots of things are within walking distance, so you walk to them
You can do that in the suburbs; heck, a couple of my neighbors actually walk to ... work!
Quote:
-You have more money, since you aren't constantly throwing it into your gas tank
But I'd be spending more money on my mortgage, because a comparable house in the city cost 50 percent more than my house in the 'burbs, and I'd still have to drive to work because my office isn't on a public transportation route. AND I'd be paying more in income tax if I lived in the city.
Quote:
-You have more to do - festivals and big events are always nearby
Plenty of those out in the 'burbs, too. Open your eyes.
I understand. Plus, the south industrialized later and much slower than the north. Even today it is much more agrarian than the north. Part of it could very well be politics. Building an effective public transportation system, and making suburbs more efficient costs a lot of money, and many of these southern states have leaders who dont want to spend regardless of the circumstances. Granted it is a bad economy and I can understand the hesitance and every state has a different financial situation., but I still think it is a worthwhile goal.
A good mass transit system is a worthwhile goal. In fact, former Governor Roy Barnes was willing to put in the money for it. He had a plan to make it better. The plan never got through because he was voted out of office. There was controversy because he changed the state flag(it used to have a Confederate flag, and he minimized it to very small size, and made the flag the state seal). It angered people and he was voted out at the end of his term.
He wanted to have a central authority for coordinating state transit projects. Currently, MARTA only gets county funding. That is how mass transit works. It doesn't help that there are corruption issues.
IMO you simply have a lower quality of life when you live in the suburbs. Sure it seems "nice" that you have a big yard and "personal space" and all that, but if you look at it objectively:
-You have a lower level of health because you rarely exercise - you never walk anywhere, you always drive.
-You have less money to spend because it costs more to driver everywhere, since driving is expensive
-You have less to do, because everything is so spread out, so organizations rarely hold big events nearby.
Compared to a city where:
-You generally exercise more since lots of things are within walking distance, so you walk to them
-You have more money, since you aren't constantly throwing it into your gas tank
-You have more to do - festivals and big events are always nearby
Oh please. Having lived in both, I've noticed it doesn't take any longer to get most places in the suburbs. Yes, it involves driving instead of walking. If you prefer to walk rather than drive, I think that's great. I like both, although I much prefer to bike than either. If you live a totally sedentary lifestyle and it's you're only form of physical activity... well, I guess it's better than nothing. But let's get real, walking four blocks to the bus stop isn't exactly an active lifestyle. Rent in Sacramento's grid (the only part that is really "urban" and walkable) would be at least half again as much and more like double. That's great. I can save maybe $100 a month driving around town, and that's being generous, and pay $500-1000 more a month in rent. Do you never go out of town? I'm sure there are people who live in the suburbs who are homebodies, but amazingly you can actually leave. This weekend I stayed in town for the Greek festival. Labor day weekend I was up in the Sierras hiking and then Sacramento on Sunday for Gold Rush Days with my nieces, weekend before that was America's Cup in San Francisco and visiting friends. Big events are a total non-issue for suburban dwellers. Some suburbs have a lack of get off work and have a couple pints, go out for dinner, catch a local show types of entertainment. I have a friend that would rather commit seppuku than live somewhere where there isn't at least a half dozen chances of accidentally tripping and ending up with a beer or two on the way home from work. It's the one thing I do miss about living in the city. I'm rather skeptical about how these frequent after work detours were good for my waste line or wallet.
IMO you simply have a lower quality of life when you live in the suburbs. Sure it seems "nice" that you have a big yard and "personal space" and all that, but if you look at it objectively:
-You have a lower level of health because you rarely exercise - you never walk anywhere, you always drive.
-You have less money to spend because it costs more to driver everywhere, since driving is expensive
-You have less to do, because everything is so spread out, so organizations rarely hold big events nearby.
Compared to a city where:
-You generally exercise more since lots of things are within walking distance, so you walk to them
-You have more money, since you aren't constantly throwing it into your gas tank
-You have more to do - festivals and big events are always nearby
The health issue has been discussed time and again on this forum. The suburbs have the highest percentage of healthy people, and in general, lower percentages of obesity. Do a search on this forum or on Google.
Re: money-please provide some links.
Re: More to do-you're wrong. Again, search this forum. Keep in mind that suburbanites live in an urban area, so they can always access the events in the city, if they so desire.
A good mass transit system is a worthwhile goal. In fact, former Governor Roy Barnes was willing to put in the money for it. He had a plan to make it better. The plan never got through because he was voted out of office. There was controversy because he changed the state flag(it used to have a Confederate flag, and he minimized it to very small size, and made the flag the state seal). It angered people and he was voted out at the end of his term.
He wanted to have a central authority for coordinating state transit projects. Currently, MARTA only gets county funding. That is how mass transit works. It doesn't help that there are corruption issues.
Its too bad it didnt go through. In my state (Florida) the federal government was willing to give money for a high speed rail from Orlando to Tampa, but governor Rick Scott turned it down, so the money wen elsewhere. At least part of the reason he turned it down was to appeal to his base, showing that we didnt need help from the Feds. This is kind of silly because 40% of our revenue structure for the budget comes from the federal government.
Oh please. Having lived in both, I've noticed it doesn't take any longer to get most places in the suburbs. Yes, it involves driving instead of walking. If you prefer to walk rather than drive, I think that's great. I like both, although I much prefer to bike than either. If you live a totally sedentary lifestyle and it's you're only form of physical activity... well, I guess it's better than nothing. But let's get real, walking four blocks to the bus stop isn't exactly an active lifestyle. Rent in Sacramento's grid (the only part that is really "urban" and walkable) would be at least half again as much and more like double. That's great. I can save maybe $100 a month driving around town, and that's being generous, and pay $500-1000 more a month in rent. Do you never go out of town? I'm sure there are people who live in the suburbs who are homebodies, but amazingly you can actually leave. This weekend I stayed in town for the Greek festival. Labor day weekend I was up in the Sierras hiking and then Sacramento on Sunday for Gold Rush Days with my nieces, weekend before that was America's Cup in San Francisco and visiting friends. Big events are a total non-issue for suburban dwellers. Some suburbs have a lack of get off work and have a couple pints, go out for dinner, catch a local show types of entertainment. I have a friend that would rather commit seppuku than live somewhere where there isn't at least a half dozen chances of accidentally tripping and ending up with a beer or two on the way home from work. It's the one thing I do miss about living in the city. I'm rather skeptical about how these frequent after work detours were good for my waste line or wallet.
But driving instead of walking or taking public transportation is a big difference. Many people in cities dont have cars so being able to walk to places is a big deal. The thing I love about Boston and Chicago (two cities I have been to recently) Is I could get on a train and get around the city very quickly, and it was affordable
I mean everyone has their preference, but another reason I like cities is their tends to be many young singles around. Ive always found suburbs to be more family oriented, or more geared toward middle aged people, with the exception being suburbs near the ocean. And I like not having to worry about driving home or getting a ride after leaving a bar, club, social event. In a city like NY or Chicago I can just hop on the subway or walk.
Its too bad it didnt go through. In my state (Florida) the federal government was willing to give money for a high speed rail from Orlando to Tampa, but governor Rick Scott turned it down, so the money wen elsewhere. At least part of the reason he turned it down was to appeal to his base, showing that we didnt need help from the Feds. This is kind of silly because 40% of our revenue structure for the budget comes from the federal government.
This is one of the reasons I don't want to live in the suburbs, at least alot of Atlanta suburbs. As soon as I get a chance, I'm leaving Georgia.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
