These suburbia homes are still pretty bad deal for the public. Lots of infrastructure cost come with them like car infrastructure etc.
But while some (young) people are fine with super-dense urban living, not needing a car, and rarely leaving their city, many people place a very high value on space, peace+quiet, and the increased freedom to travel that cars offer.
I find the ability to walk to my library or grocery store infinitely more freeing than having to buckle in to my car and drive to my destination. I like being able to hop on my bicycle and get out of the city, without having to navigate suburban style 45mph stroads. I like the actual peace and quiet as opposed to the leaf blower brigade firing up at 7am. This suburban lifestyle ain’t for me.
> I like being able to hop on my bicycle and get out of the city
You find it safer to bike in NYC or SF than in a quiet low-traffic suburb?
I did spend a lot of time biking in Manhattan in my youth but I wouldn't call it safe. Much safer cycling these days in the suburbs with low traffic.
1. Whatever suburb you live in is extremely unusual as far as suburbs go. Suburbs are almost defined by the lack of amenities accessible by foot. Hence the whole “15 minute city” thing. If you’ve got that in a suburb, that’s a great suburb.
2. There are cities other than New York and SF. For what it’s worth, I lived in NYC for a decade+ and rode my bike as my main mode of transportation for a lot of my time there. And the comparison isn’t even close. Yes. I absolutely find it safer riding my bike in Manhattan than in the quiet suburb I find myself living now. Infrastructure matters. And the infrastructure here is solely built for car driving.
I disagree. Every suburb I've ever lived in has had services within walking distance.
> Suburbs are almost defined by the lack of amenities accessible by foot.
Well... If you decide to define suburb by lack of walkable amenities, then of course by definition any place that's walkable isn't a suburb. Tautologically, so I can't argue with that.
But I will argue that this is not actually the definition of suburb!
> There are cities other than New York and SF
Sure but those are the top two densest cities in the US, so worth considering.
> Yes. I absolutely find it safer riding my bike in Manhattan than in the quiet suburb
Interesting. Well that's very different from my experience. Riding a bike in Manhattan is an extreme sport. I did it in my youth along with other risky things but in hindsight maybe a bit too much risk. Riding a bike out here in the quiet suburbs is a pleasure since there's so much less traffic and more space.
The original comment was carefully worded to avoid any statement about whether suburbia was a good or bad deal for the people who want to live there.
Similarly to how protectionism and subsidies can be a good deal for those people who benefit from them, but still be a bad deal for the public.
Sure transit is cheaper than roads (and suburb costs don't count the cost of a car, while transit counts those costs), but roads are not that expensive over the lifetime.
People didn’t like having 3 lane roads right in their path to walk to the grocery store.
The municipal solution was to ensure everyone needed to drive everywhere.
What “more” are you talking about? I’m very interested in this.
Ok… thanks I guess.
This is the only way to make these changes at the local level.
People simply do not want to engage because they either literally don't have time, or are taking that time to prepare for their next shift.
An idle society, somewhat more like what the French have (as one example), can be seen as in constant cycles of rebellion. This is the way it should be done.
I won't make value judgement on human beings, I will just judge the systems that they must function inside of. And a system that deprives you of time and relaxation is a way to subvert democracy on a very basic level.
If we were to repair this issue in the US, it would likely take generations to accomplish.
And now that it is the norm, are people defending it because they actually agree, or are they just afraid of change and too weak to fight it now that it is normal?
I notice bad ideas usually die with a few defenders, whose arguments can be summed up with "it just works for me" in the face of all evidence. Suburbs seem to be one of those concepts.
People can choose now, some like suburban life, some like city life. Maybe this is influenced by media (not many shows with young 20 year olds in suburbia, or families in the city. It’s typically teens - suburbs, 20s singles city, parents suburbs, empty nesters skew more city again. But maybe that reflects what people like.