7 ms·
When sfhs come at the expense of the land required to provide reasonably situated and cost effective high density? No. The needs of society as a whole outweigh
by DropInIn 3y ago
When sfhs come at the expense of the land required to provide reasonably situated and cost effective high density?
No. The needs of society as a whole outweigh the wants of a few excessively privileged persons.
- electriclove 3y agoI’m not arguing for a single family home in Manhattan or Hong Kong. There is plenty of land for single family homes in the suburbs. Needs change as people progress through life.
- DropInIn 3y agoAnd the infrastructure to support these "remote" homes is paid for by whom? Also, if we don't do as you want and instead build high density only and start demolishing the sprawling suburbs then we can have forests a 5 minute walk from everyone... Parks everywhere, nature thriving, while we have to only travel 4 blocks to do everything we need to in life because the density means that Walmart and everything else can and will be in close proximity to Everyone all without the need for a personal vehicle. See, your demand has serious knock on effects you either didn't consider or view as irrelevant against your personal privileges....
- electriclove 3y agoWow, I’m sure glad you are not in charge of making decisions for how all of humanity should live their lives.
- DropInIn 3y agoMy common saying to all is: "May you live in the world as you would have it, so long as you live as the least advantaged." To me it's a blessing. To the majority it's a curse. In both cases it's a manifestation of our underlying natures and preferences. What is it to you?
- electriclove 3y agoWhy not allow everyone to live in a single family home?
- DropInIn 3y agoSeriously? I'm not playing your game.