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.
As always, urbanist seem to assume all suburbs are the same. Its one of the ways they justify their hatred of the suburbs. They just want to assume all suburbs are cookie-cutter, car dependent, no entertainment, applebees, target, 110% white, and whatever other garbage they want to think. What still amazes me, they think there is nothing wrong with an urban/city environment, there is no downside, all upside and can't see how anybody woud live someway else. They continue to live in a delusional state of mind.
Bravo! Post of the year!
Amazingly, a pretty questionable statement about the sterility of suburbs (was the poster talking about all? some? who knows!) has been shouted down by no-holds barred absolutions against the "delusion" of people in the cities.
As always, urbanist seem to assume all suburbs are the same. Its one of the ways they justify their hatred of the suburbs. They just want to assume all suburbs are cookie-cutter, car dependent, no entertainment, applebees, target, 110% white, and whatever other garbage they want to think. What still amazes me, they think there is nothing wrong with an urban/city environment, there is no downside, all upside and can't see how anybody woud live someway else. They continue to live in a delusional state of mind.
You are right ALL urbanists are guilty of believing in generalizations like that. Generalizations are seldom correct, yet ALL urbanists engage in just that kind of generalization.
You are right ALL urbanists are guilty of believing in generalizations like that. Generalizations are seldom correct, yet ALL urbanists engage in just that kind of generalization.
Wait, what?
(Edited to be less negative)
NT had gotten away from stuff like this, and several of his posts I've read here recently were useful (I think I even repped one or two).
However ... this type of "wild accusation --> fight --> backtrack --> repeat" stuff was pretty darn common for a while. I'm going to hope this is a one-off.
Last edited by HandsUpThumbsDown; 08-14-2012 at 09:16 AM..
Not so sure that's really true. I get where you're coming from, but not everyone really has much of a choice in their living arrangements. Sometimes you go where you can find a place to live.
Then again, I am still a bit dazed after emerging (with an apartment!) from a long and difficult Bay Area apartment search. The rental market in the city of San Francisco is absolutely brutal right now -- few apartments to be found, even if you can afford one. We ended up in a suburb as a result, although we were lucky enough to find a place in a suburb that offered many of the "urban" amenities that we value.
Or someone in say, the Detroit metro wouldn't have of a choice in urban living arrangements, or at least appealing ones. For families, poor schools limit the choices further in most metros. And in one could argue that many American cities don't offer much in the way of dense, walkable areas so there's not much difference from a typical suburb.
Malloric: Thing is, there were active efforts to force people out of cities and into suburbs (or just "out wherever" in the case of certain folks.) That's pretty easy to demonstrate and very well documented. The idea that there is a counter-movement to demolish the suburbs and force everyone downtown is ridiculous and imaginary. And, as you say, the real "attack" going on right now is the continued suburban assault on America's rural communities, farmland, and open country.
Yes, cities had and continue to have what we both consider bad public policies. That's purely a case-by-case basis, and until it changes I see very little hope for real revitalization of cities. I also don't consider growth an assault.
Development's a *****. Me, I'm not a fan of condofication, which is SACOG's vision for the Central Sacramento area. Over 47,000 additional dwellings mostly through "reinvestment on existing developed properties" (read; bulldozers). You can pretty much bet where this is going to occur and where it's not. It won't be East Sacramento that gets bulldozed for densification. Speaking of efforts to force people out of the central area, guess who isn't going to be able to afford the $300,000 Fourth Avenue Lofts and $1600 a month 1bd "Midtown" apartments?
Got gentrification? A few condos like a few houses in a rural area, fine. Too many and the guy who owned horses gets chased off by the surburbanites just as the existing population gets chased of by the condo yuppies. SACOG calling for assault on our urban communities?
Quote:
The SACOG blueprint, and other regional "smart growth" plans like it, are only an attack on the "way of life" of suburban real estate developers. The idea is to keep rural places rural as much as possible, currently suburban places suburban as much as possible, and encourage growth in city centers where there is already growth.
I'm not sure how you figure that. SACOG calls for increasing suburban development. Blueprint calls for MORE growth in Lincoln, Folsom, Placerville, Yuba City, Auburn, Elk Grove, and so on than would occur in "Dumb Growth." Blueprint also calls for increasing the shift of jobs from the city to the suburbs over "Dumb Growth." Again, good for suburban developers. What it's bad for is custom house builders. Hypothetically, anyway. El Dorado County has already hit it's 2050 growth numbers. Incidentally, 95%+ of that growth occurred in EDH and not rural or farm land. Dumb Growth at work.
Quote:
As you say, if there's an attack, it is toothless and ineffective, which makes the idea of an attack hard to justify as anything other than a fantasy. Rhetoric, or not liking the way someone else lives but being powerless to do anything about it, hardly counts as an attack, except by those who are threatened and traumatized by the mere idea that someone might think differently.
I agree that it's far-fetched that Blueprint would ever be strictly implemented. An attack wasn't really what its intent was ever meant to be. It is, however, very much a case of someone trying to impose their desired lifestyles on all of us. Some people want to live in EDH as it is now. Others probably would like it to go back to what it looked like in the 1980s, others still would prefer it as it existed in the '50s.
For a hypothetical, imagine if way back in 1880 when suburbanization really started to kick off in the Sacramento is someone decided to "put a stop to the assault of our farm land and rural communities." No East Sacramento, No Land Park. Interesting thought to imagine a significant portion of Sacramento's 2.5 million people crowded into a roughly five square mile area. Say it's 2 million with another 500,000 spread about the small rural communities or engaged in farming. At 400,000 per square mile that's on the high end for density of the tenements of the Lower East Side during the early 1900s, certainly doable especially today where we can build taller. Of course, the tenements achieved that density by pack 'em and stack 'em. Not everyone wants to live eight deep to a 460 square foot apartment. But we can build higher than that now to offset it. And there's always Kowloon City to make you feel better about yourself. http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2...d-present.html
NT had gotten away from stuff like this, and several of his posts I've read here recently were useful (I think I even repped one or two).
However ... this type of "wild accusation --> fight --> backtrack --> repeat" stuff was pretty darn common for a while. I'm going to hope this is a one-off.
In the time i've been on this forum, I've never heard 1 urbanist acknowledge that their way of living isn't for everybody. Everytime urbanist complain about the suburbs, its the same complaints. Its all cookie-cutter, its too sterile, apparently suburbs don't have "independent" bars. When urbanist can acknowledge you can have fun in suburbs and that their way of living isn't for anybody, i'll continue to hold the same view. You guys are just simply delusional.
In the time i've been on this forum, I've never heard 1 urbanist acknowledge that their way of living isn't for everybody. Everytime urbanist complain about the suburbs, its the same complaints. Its all cookie-cutter, its too sterile, apparently suburbs don't have "independent" bars. When urbanist can acknowledge you can have fun in suburbs and that their way of living isn't for anybody, i'll continue to hold the same view. You guys are just simply delusional.
In the time i've been on this forum, I've never heard 1 urbanist acknowledge that their way of living isn't for everybody. Everytime urbanist complain about the suburbs, its the same complaints. Its all cookie-cutter, its too sterile, apparently suburbs don't have "independent" bars. When urbanist can acknowledge you can have fun in suburbs and that their way of living isn't for anybody, i'll continue to hold the same view. You guys are just simply delusional.
You basically post the same thing over and over again.
Why does this upset you so much?
Are you insecure in your decision to move to a suburb? You made the decision that you felt is best for your family. Nobody is going to take that away from you.
You basically post the same thing over and over again.
Why does this upset you so much?
Are you insecure in your decision to move to a suburb? You made the decision that you felt is best for your family. Nobody is going to take that away from you.
i love my decision to move to the suburbs. I want to support the suburbanites and the suburbs because they constantly get bashed in this forum. I believe that urbanist are delusional and egotistical about their way of living. I'll keep posting my opinion as long as I want. This is a free forum. I may say the samething, but that isn't any different that urbanist constantly bringing up the same arguements about why they hate suburbs.
You basically post the same thing over and over again.
Why does this upset you so much?
Are you insecure in your decision to move to a suburb? You made the decision that you felt is best for your family. Nobody is going to take that away from you.
Spare us the psychoanalysis, PLEASE!
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.
Post of the year!
