View Single Post
Old 06-18-2009, 07:40 PM   #112
Bimmerman
Junior Member
 
Bimmerman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Bouncing off the Rev Limiter
Posts: 437
Note to all- DY deleted his post, but the entirety of is is presented below in the quoted text, minus the Declaration of Independence.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth_Yuthura View Post
Flaws in the counter argument.

1. Suburban sprawl and globalization were fueled by easily obtainable sources of energy.
I fail to see how that matters. Are we not supposed to capitalize on easily obtainable resources? Are we supposed to still be farmers huddled around caves? Are we supposed to not have invented steel or coal fired power plants because the raw materials are easily obtainable?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth_Yuthura View Post
When peak oil supply takes place, the price of energy is going to skyrocket and there will be difficult times ahead for those who have no substitute for their cars.
True....so long as you term 'energy' as 'oil.' You also seem convinced that everyone drives a 3mpg Suburban. That's false. When oil hit $4.50 a gallon, what happened? People drove less, but still drove. The simple fact is that the American lifestyle depends on cars for the majority of the people. If you cannot budget $30 more per week on gas (due to price fluctuations).....come on. If you can't afford the increase in something that is essential, stop going to starbucks, stop eating out, stop drinking, stop smoking, or quit bitching. Not hard. If a broke college student can afford two cars, school, and fuel to go racing (far more consumed than simple commuting), all by working during classes, and you as an established family cannot, something is very wrong.

Call cars evil all you want. Blame cars as the root of all evil and what's wrong with America all you want. That doesn't change the fact that people are buying more fuel efficient cars to lessen the hurt from the next inevitable price hike. That doesn't change the fact that people are smart enough to figure out ways to cope and deal with increased energy costs. People will either change their lifestyle and not drive as much, or pay more for the privilege of doing so. But do us the courtesy of allowing us to make that choice for ourselves.

Convenience has a price, but living in a big city and simply walking to the store and carrying groceries back is absolutely impractical when there's more than just you. Same goes for inclement weather, hot days, long travel needs, road trips, carrying stuff, pretty much everything. Cars will always be a part of the American culture and society. Stop tilting at windmills trying to change that fact, especially when great strides are being made in vehicle emissions and efficiency.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth_Yuthura View Post
2. Suburbs are more expensive per capita to maintain.
....and your proof for that blanket statement is...what, exactly?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth_Yuthura View Post
In terms of costs, you would find that what people pay in taxes is artificially generated and has no bearing on what it costs to maintain per capita.
Um.....what? People pay tax, that's hardly artificially generated. The property tax, city sales tax, and state income tax all go towards paying for the services provided in the suburb. The higher the cost of the house, the larger the property tax, which pays for the maintenance cost and service cost. Including this, it is cheaper to live in the Suburb and commute everywhere in a 2mpg F1 car, changing tires every 40 miles.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth_Yuthura View Post
3. environmentally destructive.

Sorry, but urban activity destroys nature. When you create a sprawl city, you create an artificially maintained landscape.
....and building apartment buildings and mass transit and buses doesn't? Humans destroy nature, no matter where you are living. Artificial landscapes aren't necessarily bad for the environment, they are simply different.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth_Yuthura View Post
4. Government services are severely lacking.
Proof. The burden of proof for these statements is on you.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth_Yuthura View Post
More taxpayers in a smaller area allows for more funding to civil servants and less to their vehicles. Ever hear of transportation oriented development? It's that significant to the function of a community.
Jesus, you're a socialist and borderline communist. I would much rather spend the money on my car driving as I please where I please instead of paying some high school dropout to tell me where it is best for the community that I travel. Absolutely not. Transportation oriented development is the exact same thing as a suburb; it is oriented around people owning their own house and driving their car. Hundreds of millions of Americans are happy with this; why aren't you? Have you ever lived in a suburb or small town?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth_Yuthura View Post
5. Less is more.
I would get banned for saying my thoughts as bluntly as I'd like.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth_Yuthura View Post
For most of human history, it has always been a quest to search for more resources when demand went up. The current dilemma is unlike any in the past because the goal should be targeted at reducing demand because most supply WILL NOT hold up under the current demands of the US. Any assumption that innovation will always bail us out of our predicaments is foolhardy.
No. The current dilemma is not even remotely centered around reducing demand; that's what you want to have happen. Toss words like supply and demand around enough, without any discussion of what item or commodity is being supplied or demanded, and you have basically genericized your argument into uselessness.

Furthermore, your blatant disregard for innovation is troubling. Have you paid any attention to the fuel savings introduced in cars in the last few years? Do you have any idea how much a minute increase in powerplant efficiency affects fuel consumption and output? Do you have any idea how better knowledge of materials has lightened and cheapened things without any degradation in safety, performance, or strength? Do you have any idea what agricultural advances there have been since the dawn of time? You thinking that pursuing innovation and improvement is a waste of time and resources frankly scares me.

You do realize that without innovators, we would not have AC electricity to power your ideal transportation? Wow.

Your idea of 'less is more' runs counter to American culture. I want to have a house, filled with a nice TV, sound system, car parts, car lift, tools, a nice yard, a beautiful wife, kids, a dog, guns, three or four cars, bicycles, a boat, camping stuff, etc. I agree that it is not needed. I absolutely reject your assertion that I am a better person and will live a happier life without these things. I have gone backpacking in the wilderness for weeks on end, and nothing makes me happier than to go home and enjoy my life with my stuff. I live in Munich now, with two suitcases of clothes, no car, no bike, a laptop, and a camera, and I cannot stand it. I have more than I need to survive, true, but I am not happy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Declaration of Independence
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
As an American, I have the right to live my life in liberty as I see fit, pursuing my happiness the best way I can. My happiness does not revolve around the things themselves, but around what they allow me to do-- go racing, live comfortably, live without next-wall neighbors, go skiing, go hiking, cook, shoot, etc. New Urbanism threatens my unalienable right to the pursuit of happiness, my personal liberty, and my life.

The classic American dream is to start from nothing, work and earn money as best you can, start a family, buy a house, buy a car or two, and retire richer and happier than you were before. Your urban theory claims my dream is hurtful to society and my fellow man, and that offends me greatly. Basically, according to you and your theory, anyone who is successful enough to afford a house away from the city should be punished, as everyone should live the same way near where they work and buy food, and never go anywhere. That, frankly, is banworthy-word stupid.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth_Yuthura View Post
We've got overcrowding in all our cities already, so let's move out West!
You would honestly rather live packed on top of hundreds of other people in an apartment building, walking everywhere, relying on the government, than being responsible for your own damn self? Wow.

Please don't move out here and try to change my lifestyle. I enjoy it, I pay for it, do me the courtesy of leaving myself and fellow citizens the hell alone.

The point of this thread, as far as I can tell, is to debate suburban sprawl. Debate means discussion with facts. I, and others, have laid out our reasoning and experiences that justify our intense opposition to your proposed idea. You, as far as I can tell, have made no effort to understand our side, nor do anything about rant on why we are fools and that we should all live in apartments within walking distance of public transportation and everything. You spout talking points like a politician, but do not back them up with anything of substance. No facts, no sources, nothing except what reads as a textbook.

I understand where you are coming from, and thought somewhat similarly (regarding transportation, not on the suburbs part of your argument) prior to moving out here and experiencing exactly what you are proposing. I have found it to be horrible, and you will never convince me to give it another try. It flat out will not work for Americans in anything other than the biggest cities where not even close to the majority of the population lives.

My biggest issue with your unwavering belief in this idea is that it assumes my aspirations, my goals, my world, is unworthy as an alternative. It assumes that everyone is the same, that everyone wants to not have to drive, only wants to live within walking distance of work and the markets. "New Urbanism" threatens my way of life, and I have every right to defend myself and my dreams.


A racing addiction makes a crack addiction look like a vague desire for something salty. -Randy Hickman

Fear disturbs your concentration. - Sabine Schmitz
Bimmerman is offline   you may: