DY, you are continually ignoring the fact that Jae, myself, and many others in this thread have pointed out-- that we don't want to live in a big city. Therefore, your urban utopia is inherently flawed.
No-one here is confronting a painful truth. My painful truth came when I moved from beautiful Boulder to beautiful Munich. I lived in the big city. I hate the big city. I won't repeat the reasons a third time. I am saving for a down payment for a nice suburban house even though I am single at the moment. Wasteful? Maybe so. Unlike you, many others in this thread have lived in the big cities of the world and have experienced this urban model your sociology professor is proselytizing. I reject it as inferior and restrictive. I want the freedom to do what I want on my land; that is impossible in a big city. It is an inherently American (and western) desire as well; my German friends here have no such desire.
If anyone in this thread is ignoring evidence to the contrary, it is you. Keep telling us how this is a great theory, how it will revolutionize urban settings, how it will save the planet, how it will ..... .
I do not see why I should change my lifestyle and sacrifice my happiness and financial security just to not have to drive and live 'efficiently.' I'm an engineer; my profession revolves around doing things the most efficient way possible within realistic constraints. You sound like a liberal arts college student without any real world experience; you're missing the realistic constraint aspect to this discussion.
Here are the biggest flaws in your argument:
1) Americans culturally like having privacy and space. This will not change.
2) Big cities are expensive
3) Suburbs are nicer in all measurable ways-- lower crime, more trees, less people, etc etc
4) Big cities have lots of people. Many Americans don't like that....why else would we have moved out West?
As for inspiring a better future, you have done nothing of the sort. I cringe at the thought of being required or forced to live in the big city all in the name of almighty Efficiency. Flame me or ignore me all you like, but I will always be a very vocal opposing voice to increased urbanization.
What you ask the people to do, in the name of more ideal and efficient living, is near socialism. Removed Flamebait ~ mimartin
To be fair, it is a very ideal model of an urban society. It just doesn't work in reality. I'm proof. Either ignore the fact that both Jae and myself have experienced both sides, and continue to spout your professor's textbook, or find out why we dislike and reject the model and change the model to fit the people you are wanting to apply it to.
An engineer can design a perfect part, but if it cannot be manufactured, there's no point. Similarly, you can accept a theory of urbanism, but if the other people do not accept or flat out reject it, there's also no point in clinging to said model. Either accept our differences on the issue and try to find common ground, or don't and continue to spout elitist nonsense.
A racing addiction makes a crack addiction look like a vague desire for something salty.
Fear disturbs your concentration.
- Sabine Schmitz
Last edited by mimartin; 06-18-2009 at 09:26 PM.
Reason: removed flaimbait