1370
Anon likes bikes (sh.itjust.works)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 45 points 11 months ago

Distance. An hour commute or a 20 minute trip to the grocery store. We killed walkable neighborhoods so now here we are. Trapped.

[-] OldWoodFrame@lemm.ee 44 points 11 months ago

But we can't have 15 minute cities because...that's tyranny somehow?

[-] ghostdoggtv@lemmy.world 10 points 11 months ago

Too much democracy! Tyranny of the majority!

[-] JayDee@lemmy.ml 9 points 11 months ago

Start yelling at your city legislators then. Force them to change how the city zones so things are closer together. It will take a couple decades of work, but you have to be apart of that change for it to happen.

[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Oh I do but for as much as conservatives whine about California it's not really a progressive state. More like a solid liberal bastion of performative politics. Where they'll talk about banning guns from state property like it's going to solve firearms deaths and just don't look at how we're treating homeless people...

[-] JayDee@lemmy.ml 4 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

That's fair - I wish you luck in your town hall meetings and marchs. Local change is always the fastest.

[-] uis@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Open your own grocery store. Or allow others to do so.

[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 7 points 11 months ago

I would if I could. But I can't beat Walmart prices an hour away on Transit.

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

That's why you don't see 15 minute cities anymore. Capitalism already figured out that a few large stores allow you to hire more efficient numbers of employees, buy more for less, stock better variety, pass along some of the savings to customers and still make more profit than building lots and lots of repeated commercial infrastructure throughout residential areas. A return to that model would require more employees in low paying service jobs, and would sacrifice lower prices and better variety. Ironically, it would be far faster to use a car to skip from store to store to look for the best deals and the specific brands you want. I suppose we could also get rid of capitalism at the same time, but I'm not holding my breath. As much as I like the idea of walkable infrastructure, it comes at a cost that I am not sure many would be willing to pay.

[-] Nalivai@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 11 months ago

It's very weird that it works all over Europe, but for some reason it's too expansive for America. It's almost like it's not an inevitable course of actions really actually.

[-] Grabthar@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

Might have a wee something to do with the cost and availability of large parcels of land in and around cities in Europe versus North America. If Walmart thought this was a cost-effective approach, they'd be doing it, else they would likely be sued by their shareholders. To be clear, I am not making a value judgement on whether this should be the case.

[-] Nalivai@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Yeah, it is indeed a good approach for Walmart. They get to crush the competition due to their size and the economy of scale, be effectively a monopoly, and convince everyone that it's not only logical and inevitable, and the result of something normal, but good actually.
The question is, is it good for people who aren't Walmart shareholders?

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

If transit gets dense enough then isn't it walkable in an indirect manner?

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

I suppose, but then it isn't really any different than what we have now in the best of our cities worldwide. Unfortunately, it seems very few cities actually have the resources and the political capital to make that work.

[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

Yeah. But until we deal with the affordability problem walkable cities aren't going to be a thing because it will be too expensive.

[-] Nalivai@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

It's the other way around. Cities in US are expensive now because there is not a lot of those compared to the amount of people who would like to live in them. If you allow builders to build more walkable cities they will become more affordable. And the scale is only part of it, the fact that city brings revenue to the government and suburbia isn't is a big part too.

[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

I agree that we need to keep going on walkable cities. I just don't think we're going to see the investment in small business we need until we properly regulate corporations.

[-] Holzkohlen@feddit.de 3 points 11 months ago

A car cuck utopia

[-] tiredofsametab@kbin.social 2 points 10 months ago

You can do what I did and move to another country. It just takes a lot of time, work, and money to get there (though money can accelerate the former two, in some cases).

[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

I'd love to. And the brain drain is already beginning. College is cheaper and just as good over seas. That's always the first stage because you never get all the kids back.

this post was submitted on 10 Jan 2024
1370 points (96.5% liked)

Greentext

4555 readers
2104 users here now

This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.

Be warned:

If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS