People Who Live In Suburbs: Classy, Icky, or Dudes?

That's assuming that people's decisions on where to live are driven purely by economic factors and remain the same regardless of age, size of household, etc.

surely they are not driven by nothing but economic factors, but "when something is more expensive, some people will buy less of it" is not a radical idea, is it?

also m bison otm, *should* be speaking for me.

^^^^ xpost to goole
economic factors gen do not affect individuals all that dramatically, but they affect lots and lots of ppl in small ways that add up meaningfully on the whole

if suburuban regs were relaxed they would become more dense and more city-like in the aggregate. it's not about people "moving back into the city" proper, it's about the whole urban area (urb + suburbs) being allowed to build up instead of being forced to build only out

^^^^

I think Alfred was teasing you because you quoted him as saying "most Americans."

Yep.

but "when something is more expensive, some people will buy less of it" is not a radical idea, is it?

Not when you're taking your Microeconomics 101 final, no, but in the real world things are more complicated than that, especially when it comes to things like "Where should I live?" People don't buy "housing" like they do "insurance" in the Progressive commercials.

economic factors gen do not affect individuals all that dramatically, but they affect lots and lots of ppl in small ways that add up meaningfully on the whole

The phrase "lots and lots of people" is sure doing a lot of heavy lifting for you.

like, of course it's 'more complicated than that'. but price *plays a role* in anyone's decision making.

if suburuban regs were relaxed they would become more dense and more city-like in the aggregate. it's not about people "moving back into the city" proper, it's about the whole urban area (urb + suburbs) being allowed to build up instead of being forced to build only out

i can get behind that, i think. tho i think the main issue is structuring suburbs around walkable "downtowns" and public trans and then, y'know, providing that public trans. i'd def take a bus the 5 miles to my work if a) one existed and b) the nearby area was compact enough and pedestrian-friendly so there were a fair amount of walkable lunch options.

Sure, but it's more like they pick the place they want to live first, then look for the correct combination of price and other factors.

which is to say, urbanize them xp

Sure, but it's more like they pick the place they want to live first, then look for the correct combination of price and other factors.

"pick the place they want to live" - price is already playing a role in this thought process.

sure i guess, if you want to use your personal definitions of urban and suburban.

and yeah jaymc, i think a lot of people in their 20s who grew up in the burbs and hated it, couldn't wait to move to big city and were glad they did, assume all of their peers feel/felt the same way.

which ties into iatee's "lots and lots of people wanna live an urban life but can't afford it" thing

serious question for iatee - if New Richmond, WI (small town picked at random btw) fits what Granny just described up there, is that still a problem, and if so, why?

no

GD, my guess is that even some of the people who used the epithet "Boringbrook" w/r/t our hometown eventually realized that it was a decent place to raise a family or whatever.

yep! my best friend who has a kid on the way just bought a house a stone's throw from the old BHS! kinda bizarre really.

xpost to iatee: ok cool! this is kinda why i think were arguing for the same outcome but from different angles (ie my reasoning for living where i do) - i just see the behavior of peeps as the thing that needs fixing (shopping locally, diminished driving, sustainable living, etc) and think that their location doesnt preclude that happening wherever.

well, sometimes the location does preclude it! a city needs to be a certain size and be willing to attempt a certain density for that future to be possible. but again, I haven't been using 'suburbia' to mean "those houses outside of a major city" or whatever, I've been using it to mean "suburban" as an urban environment and style of development - and like I said, this describes areas inside the political boundaries of major US cities.

(and doesn't always describe areas outside of a major city)

i just see the behavior of peeps as the thing that needs fixing (shopping locally, diminished driving, sustainable living, etc) and think that their location doesnt preclude that happening wherever.

Location precludes those things happening in a lot of places without significant changes to zoning etc that have already been detailed here. Even if everyone in Suburb XYZ woke up tomorrow willing to walk 10 blocks for their groceries, they wouldn't be ABLE to, and they won't be able to for years to come unless something is changed on a city government level...?

and people are also reading things into my POV - I don't think suburbia is necessarily a bad place to live or grow up or raise a family! I don't think that people there are any more uncultured than your average person in brooklyn! I don't think that it's only white people!

I just think that it's a very economically and environmentally inefficient style of life, and it's unfortunate that we have policies in place (from fed to local level) that make it cheap and omnipresent. and as much as people talk about changing those policies, it's something that requires (what would appear to be) radical steps and real sacrifices from suburbanites.

Hell, I lived in Ho-Ho-Kus, New Jersey at one point, and even though it was only a 10-min walk from our house to the "center" of "town" (ie the post office, a church, and a wine store), NO ONE WALKED. Everyone in town got into their leased luxury cars and drove to the coffee shop for their newspaper and joe. And this is in a place that DOES have sidewalks and one or two streets of small interesting stores and eateries and where people have enormous financial advantages over most of the rest of the country.

Shit, I intended to delete that as being not-really-on-topic but I posted it by mistake. I'm listening to classical piano on one earphone and got distracted. :(

very easy for you to say as an urbanite
xp

right but the change in behavior leads to the political changes necessary (which can occur faster than we might assume). and yeah theres shitty laws out there that make these sorts of changes difficult, but they are hardly the province of the suburbs alone (case in point, many cities have strict regulations about stuff like houses not being allowed to have a chicken in your yard - thats stupid.) suburban areas do have one advantage over cities that i think is getting ignored, which is the availability of plantable space. single family dwellings are a great step toward vegetable gardens and other green space options, and dense apartment living (which is the predominate case in most major cities) fails in that. all the community gardens in the world simply arent going to be enough.

it doesn't matter if it's "easy for me to say", a good transportation system in your suburb does not affect my life as much as it affects yours.

well i don't view a good transportation system as a sacrifice tho

well, convince your neighbors?

Despite the best intentions of ILXors and the "Gardening 2010" thread, which fills me with envy, almost 100% of that plantable space in the suburbs is planted with grass that requires heavy doses of chemicals and more water than the flood plains of Egypt in order to look properly golf-course-like.

And, in North Jersey, at least, whatever isn't planted with grass is planed with impatiens. I hate impatiens.

my parents have converted about half of our backyard into a vegetable garden. it's pretty great. we still have a front lawn though which yeah, uses a lot of water :(

gardening is pretty hard work though

my neighbors prob don't either, seeing as I live 200 yds from a train station

sounds like you're set

almost 100% of that plantable space in the suburbs is planted with grass that requires heavy doses of chemicals and more water than the flood plains of Egypt in order to look properly golf-course-like.

this is changing though! again i can only speak from personal experience, but i think trends towards gardening and non-invasive landscaping are significantly rising.

would be if my job were either in chicago or one of the downtowns along the metra rail. like i said, as much as i'm not down w/the "cars are evil!" mentality, structuring areas to be dependent on needing a car to do the basics of life (earn a living, buy food, get drunk communally) is the real problem as i see it.

xpost That's good to hear. I hate grass lawns on both an aesthetic and ecological level.

as much as i'm not down w/the "cars are evil!" mentality, structuring areas to be dependent on needing a car to do the basics of life (earn a living, buy food, get drunk communally) is the real problem as i see it.

yeah but once you've fixed that problem, a car is basically superfluous

When shopping for groceries for a family of 6, a car is never superfluous. It would be nice, though, if you didn't need it for EVERYTHING.

zipcar etc.

lots of things are superfluous, chairman!

i've always been curious about the amount of gas used by persons (whether for commuting or for recreational/leisure activities) vs amount used for commercial activities (transport of goods, work crews and equipment, etc.) anyone got any stats?

http://www.nrdc.org/air/energy/fensec.asp

'Passenger cars use more than 40 percent of the oil consumed in America'

Hmmm. That doesn't necessarily mean the other 60% is all used for commercial transportation, though. Inconclusive.

right, but the 40% isn't inconclusive

ok now give me the %'s in other countries!

Does "passenger cars" include taxicabs, airport shuttles, etc.? Or are they referring to privately-owned vehicles only?

could be higher than 40% - that particular stat depends on whether the rest of their economy is fueled by oil or not. per capita #s would be a better comparison, no? here's overall:

http://static.seekingalpha.com/uploads/2008/1/7/wsj_oil_chart.jpg

looking for passenger car numbers

right, but the 40% isn't inconclusive

― iatee, Thursday, June 10, 2010 10:27 AM Bookmark

Right, but that wasn't the question.