Then your belief is wrong.

Good, then. People want to live in the largest living space they can afford. If they can do so without increasing their footprint, all the better.

And if you lived in a proper city the kids could just, you know, walk there.

I don’t know where you are, but in the US, we don’t have cities that you would define as “proper”. There are multiple challenges:

  1. Most of our urban population lives in cities that were constructed, largely, after the advent of the automobile. They assume people are driving, not walking. So, even the urban dweller often needs to go somewhere they can’t walk to.
  2. Because of the population shifts going back to the 50’s, the closest-in urban dwellers to the city are extremely low income. Because of this, many of our urban centers are have high crime rates. Even if the grocery is just down two blocks, that’s no good if you get mugged going there. And that’s even worse for kids; people move to the ‘burbs for safety reasons.
  3. The average temperatures in many US cities are a lot hotter than in Europe. Even in northern cities like Chicago, it’s not unusual to have months of temperatures at 30 C. And commuting by foot in cities like Houston or Dallas are unthinkable in the summertime.

That all may be regrettable, but you can’t blow up a city and rebuild it to suit. You have to live with what you’ve got.

Except that doesnt happen in a more urbanized cities in, say, Europe?

To my point; we have what we have. We don’t have cities that for four hundred years been constructed with the convenience of the urban resident in mind; we have cities that for the last hundred years have been constructed assuming people are driving in for work and driving out for life.

See, for some reason in US houses are built with horrible thermal insulation. Its a phenomenon not seen elsewhere in the world.

Agreed. We still build framed houses. Framed houses work fine in moderate weather; they suck in the subtropics. We should start building with more concrete, which is better on energy…..but we don’t.

Damn, that website is ass! Also did you guys just discovered apartment buildings or what? Or is your point just that you are building an urban minicities in suburbs or something?

The point is that because of the above factors, we simply can’t retool our urban areas and make them instantly family friendly and convienent for foot traffic. However, that doesn’t mean that we don’t see the benefits.

Think of it this way: We can’t bulldoze eight city blocks of high-end office buidlings to put in soccer fields downtown. And even if we could, we’d still have high crime rates in the area.

Solution? Well, build some high density centers in the suburbs next to the soccer fields. :-) You provide all the benefits of living in a urban environment, and you have none of the drawbacks, except you still have to commute in to work.

Can’t have everything, after all.

Free markets, free minds. Question all narratives. If you think one political party is right and the other party is evil, the problem with our politics is you.

Free markets, free minds. Question all narratives. If you think one political party is right and the other party is evil, the problem with our politics is you.