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 think there is going to be another age of enlightenment in the future. I think birth rates will drop drastically and the US population will settle at around 200 million. Most people will return to smaller towns and rural living. People will work at home mostly. People will live closer to the farms where their food is grown and they will have less stress.
So...your point is you're mad you can't afford to live in the super rich parts of California and associate it with liberals? Whatever...if you can afford to have your car, gas, etc, good for you. Until an alternative becomes the norm, and most likely even after that, urbanism will remain a big appeal.
Unless u live in a northern inland area or Nipomo or sacrifice everything else to have a house, its the only way to live here, or of course make lots of money.
If it's important to you, endeavor to make some money. That's how adults get to live in nice houses in nice areas.
Birth rates are below replacement rate in the US, when you take out all the illegal Mexican immigrants having kids. There is no overpopulation crisis in the US, but the Progressives want more and more foreigners living here who have 6-10 kids per family and can't afford to have them.
Well, such progressivism is at the core of running a business, not only supporting the idea of foreigners working for them but they also love their cities.
I think city planners and liberals, especially here in California, are pushing to stick people in dense housing developments or multi-residential units in urban areas.
First, I hope liberals realize those projects are extremely costly for someone to live there and second not everyone wants to live in an urban environment. Telling people to not use cars is just not going to happen. Most of this nation is built around roadways and suburbanization. If people liked it back in the 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s, early 2000s, and it still works for people then great!
Secondly, liberals always blame the rich and corporations for getting tax breaks. A democrat's definition of "rich" is way different than mine. If one person makes $100,000+ you are considered upper middle class and rich in my books. And not all corporations are evil. Given some are, but not all.
Anyways back to the main point. Too many liberal cities and towns are becoming too costly to live in. Colleges+lots hiking+lack of affordable housing=a place only meant for rich and liberals.
I would rather take a brand new sprawled out development with homes at affordable cost. I want a nice big beautiful house to have bbqs and my own space! God Bless the American dream!
This environment damage information - no one cares. I am a Bible believer, and this Earth is going up in flames one day. So until then I'm going to live in a suburban, cheap home close to affordable and accessible big box centers and malls and large churches. Yes that's right! I said it! Get over it! I can't stand downtown shopping if there is a parking cost involved. And I am also not interested in the beauty of downtown developments or the liberal belief that cookie cutter homes are ugly. Because I think hills covered in homes are beautiful. It's peaceful and the sound of the freeway is relaxing!
Lastly, if tearing out nature for a new tax-generating business park or college or some sort of business comes up, please take your "save the environment" elsewhere. Europe perhaps?
In the mean time, please keep our liberal cities seperate from our conservative cities. Thanks!
You're whining. Nobody is forcing you to live in any of those developments.
Personally, I believe very strongly in urbanism, but I also believe in people having the right to choose the setting in which they live. I'm not sure how much you agree with the last statement, but in the name of defending each person's right to his/her own American Dream, I hope you do.
"I'm done with this liberal belief of new urbanism...."
Rather a funny, odd comment ... coming from someone who lives in a state where most recent governors, or governors over a long period of time have been Republican, some of them "conservative." Maybe the reference is to those GOP governors who have promoted big government.
Mankind cant armonise with nature. What is really happens is isolating nature into islands with no comunication between. Our roads is like rivers that need bridges to cross. Our cities is like oceans that need boats to navigate into. Nature dosnt have apropriate technologies, mankind do. Maybe It's time to reverse roles!
High density urban islands floating over nature, encompassing all new urbanism principle is the future. Forget last millenium architecture objects and start seeing the space between buildings as the subject of design. You should see some Voids Composition & Definitions like:
I think city planners and liberals, especially here in California, are pushing to stick people in dense housing developments or multi-residential units in urban areas.
First, I hope liberals realize those projects are extremely costly for someone to live there and second not everyone wants to live in an urban environment. Telling people to not use cars is just not going to happen. Most of this nation is built around roadways and suburbanization. If people liked it back in the 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s, early 2000s, and it still works for people then great!
Secondly, liberals always blame the rich and corporations for getting tax breaks. A democrat's definition of "rich" is way different than mine. If one person makes $100,000+ you are considered upper middle class and rich in my books. And not all corporations are evil. Given some are, but not all.
Anyways back to the main point. Too many liberal cities and towns are becoming too costly to live in. Colleges+lots hiking+lack of affordable housing=a place only meant for rich and liberals.
I would rather take a brand new sprawled out development with homes at affordable cost. I want a nice big beautiful house to have bbqs and my own space! God Bless the American dream!
This environment damage information - no one cares. I am a Bible believer, and this Earth is going up in flames one day. So until then I'm going to live in a suburban, cheap home close to affordable and accessible big box centers and malls and large churches. Yes that's right! I said it! Get over it! I can't stand downtown shopping if there is a parking cost involved. And I am also not interested in the beauty of downtown developments or the liberal belief that cookie cutter homes are ugly. Because I think hills covered in homes are beautiful. It's peaceful and the sound of the freeway is relaxing!
Lastly, if tearing out nature for a new tax-generating business park or college or some sort of business comes up, please take your "save the environment" elsewhere. Europe perhaps?
In the mean time, please keep our liberal cities seperate from our conservative cities. Thanks!
Why is it that you evangelicals want to control everyone's life? No one is forcing you to live in a city. Get over it. You sound like you really do want the world to go "up in flames". Some religion.
I think there is going to be another age of enlightenment in the future. I think birth rates will drop drastically and the US population will settle at around 200 million. Most people will return to smaller towns and rural living. People will work at home mostly. People will live closer to the farms where their food is grown and they will have less stress.
Actually the UN Estimates that the US population by 2100 will be 450 Million , with 390-405 Million by 2050. As for the Food , we have Urban farms popping up all over the place , while there not a replacement for the big farms they will solve the Urban Healthy Food Desert problem. The US and the UK will be the only developed countries to grow a rapid pace this century , the rest of the developed world will start dying off Japan and Russia could lose half there Populations by 2050 due to the low birth rates..and exodus.
If you don't want to live in San Francisco you can try Richmond across the Bay. I hear there is some affordable housing around. It is suburbia and not city.
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.
