1209
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Izzy@lemmy.world 44 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

But instead of a population of 100 with small houses you will get a population of 1000 because they built 10 apartment complexes. I think I'd prefer the small houses didn't have lawns and left the nice trees and natural growth.

[-] LanternEverywhere@kbin.social 27 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

The point is for any given population size, a city is a better way to house them. Though IMO this drawing makes the difference too stark. Personally i think the optimal is a medium-highish density city of separated buildings with nature interspersed, rather than a single super high density mega block building.

[-] Fried_out_Kombi@lemmy.world 14 points 11 months ago

Yeah, the image is really just for illustrative purposes. Imo, if we just abolish restrictive zoning codes and other land use restrictions that essentially mandate sprawl, then tax carbon appropriately and build good public transit, that would likely achieve the overall "optimal" outcome. No need for a mega-arcology, but no need for government-mandated car-dependent sprawl either.

[-] jerkface@lemmy.ca 19 points 11 months ago

And fuck the 900 poor people, they can live in the fucking sea where they won't bother me.

[-] Izzy@lemmy.world -5 points 11 months ago

It's more like we wouldn't birth 900 more people because the density of livable space doesn't allow it.

[-] Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de 5 points 11 months ago
[-] Izzy@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

Agreed. They would just be birthed elsewhere. It has yet to be seen if we can hit a global population cap. It seems like it has to be reached eventually.

[-] Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de 6 points 11 months ago

There is a population cap but it's societal, people have fewer children as they get more education and higher quality of life.

Which is the solution that conservatives don't want to acknowledge, if you think overpopulation is a problem then you solve it by making people not live in such abject misery that they need 6 kids to make sure enough of them survive to take care of their parents when they grow old.

[-] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

That's not how anything works

[-] Izzy@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago

We are in a hypothetical plot of tiny land that can be thought of as the entire world. If you have an argument to make based on this rather silly hypothetical world we are talking about then feel free to make it.

[-] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

Chewbacca defense. Nice.

[-] biddy@feddit.nl 1 points 11 months ago

So those 900 people live where? In the sea?

this post was submitted on 06 Sep 2023
1209 points (86.7% liked)

Fuck Cars

9163 readers
195 users here now

A place to discuss problems of car centric infrastructure or how it hurts us all. Let's explore the bad world of Cars!

Rules

1. Be CivilYou may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.

2. No hate speechDon't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.

3. Don't harass peopleDon't follow people you disagree with into multiple threads or into PMs to insult, disparage, or otherwise attack them. And certainly don't doxx any non-public figures.

4. Stay on topicThis community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.

5. No repostsDo not repost content that has already been posted in this community.

Moderator discretion will be used to judge reports with regard to the above rules.

Posting Guidelines

In the absence of a flair system on lemmy yet, let’s try to make it easier to scan through posts by type in here by using tags:

Recommended communities:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS