4 ms·

what i personally find most insightful about this website is how the techbro culture will do anything except consider the needs of the many. why bother with goo

what i personally find most insightful about this website is how the techbro culture will do anything except consider the needs of the many. why bother with good transit when we can automate cars? why bother with copyright when we can just steal content at a scale that few can comprehend.

lotsofpulp 15d ago
The “needs”, or rather revealed preferences of many, is to live in detached single family homes on minimum 3,000 sq ft lots, with space for personal car storage. There is no way public transit works in that kind of non dense living arrangement. Do you have data to show Americans want to live in Manhattan/Tokyo style or even European style 4 story apartment/shared wall buildings? Population trends in the US show me the suburbs are far more popular, at least among those who end up having children.
- eldaisfish 15d ago
  You are not a transport planner and it shows. People in the US don’t magically “want” giant pickup trucks and pedestrian killing SUVs. They want cheap and practical vehicles, neither of which are available in large quantities. Notice how the advertising for pickups works? Straight, white, rural men in jeans telling you how your expensive pickup can drive off road? And then you read the manual and warranty where that exact usage is either forbidden or discouraged. Same with the suburbs. Those we designed and pushed by the car lobby and the US made it illegal or very unprofitable to build any alternatives Where is your data showing that people “prefer” this?
  - lotsofpulp 15d ago
    My data is the far lower prices for equivalent sized townhouses (homes that share walls) compared to detached single family houses, the increasing volumes of larger vehicles sold over smaller vehicles, and higher proportions of children in suburban areas compared to urban areas. People like space, people like choosing who to share space with, and people like feeling more powerful (sitting higher up in bigger vehicles). In my area, Zillow shows sold home prices for comparable townhomes vs detached SFH at roughly 30% lower price per square foot. People are willing to pay a couple hundred thousand dollars to not share walls. >Those we designed and pushed by the car lobby and the US made it illegal or very unprofitable to build any alternatives The US (federal government) didn't make it illegal or unprofitable to build more dense housing. Local city and county level voters made it illegal and unprofitable, because more dense housing means poorer people, and poorer people means schools with kids who have poorer parents, which typically means a peer group that may not perform as well.

lotsofpulp 15d ago

The “needs”, or rather revealed preferences of many, is to live in detached single family homes on minimum 3,000 sq ft lots, with space for personal car storage. There is no way public transit works in that kind of non dense living arrangement. Do you have data to show Americans want to live in Manhattan/Tokyo style or even European style 4 story apartment/shared wall buildings? Population trends in the US show me the suburbs are far more popular, at least among those who end up having children.

eldaisfish 15d ago
You are not a transport planner and it shows. People in the US don’t magically “want” giant pickup trucks and pedestrian killing SUVs. They want cheap and practical vehicles, neither of which are available in large quantities. Notice how the advertising for pickups works? Straight, white, rural men in jeans telling you how your expensive pickup can drive off road? And then you read the manual and warranty where that exact usage is either forbidden or discouraged. Same with the suburbs. Those we designed and pushed by the car lobby and the US made it illegal or very unprofitable to build any alternatives Where is your data showing that people “prefer” this?
- lotsofpulp 15d ago
  My data is the far lower prices for equivalent sized townhouses (homes that share walls) compared to detached single family houses, the increasing volumes of larger vehicles sold over smaller vehicles, and higher proportions of children in suburban areas compared to urban areas. People like space, people like choosing who to share space with, and people like feeling more powerful (sitting higher up in bigger vehicles). In my area, Zillow shows sold home prices for comparable townhomes vs detached SFH at roughly 30% lower price per square foot. People are willing to pay a couple hundred thousand dollars to not share walls. >Those we designed and pushed by the car lobby and the US made it illegal or very unprofitable to build any alternatives The US (federal government) didn't make it illegal or unprofitable to build more dense housing. Local city and county level voters made it illegal and unprofitable, because more dense housing means poorer people, and poorer people means schools with kids who have poorer parents, which typically means a peer group that may not perform as well.