Why the conspiracies about 15 minute cities?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, great idea, says the lily white liberal fleeing the city for “great schools.”

There are tons of 15 minute cities with great schools.

[Anonymous]

The reason this is a conspiracy is because the people behind this agenda won't be living in 15 minute cities themselves. They will continue to live in large houses behind gates and get shuttled around in black SUVs.

Whenever people propose solutions for other people while exempting themselves, it invites this sort of conspiracy thinking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The reason this is a conspiracy is because the people behind this agenda won't be living in 15 minute cities themselves. They will continue to live in large houses behind gates and get shuttled around in black SUVs.

Whenever people propose solutions for other people while exempting themselves, it invites this sort of conspiracy thinking.

What makes you think the people proposing it don’t live in the city? This sounds to me like you just made that up.

[Anonymous]

The neighborhood I grew up in felt like that. There was a street a block from my house with a small grocery store, a small drug store, a small variety store, and three corner stores that were open late and sold snacks, very basic groceries, a few deli items, and sandwiches. There was a laundromat and a dry cleaners. Within half a mile or so, there was a shoe repair shop and several restaurants. Within a mile, there was a high school, a junior high school and a few elementary schools, a library, and a post office. There was also a bus stop nearby, and small parks and one large park-like area within walking distance.

[Anonymous]

I'm confused why people are so upset. This is about moving people from dense urban hells into smaller towns. A 15 minute city is called a town. And living in a town vs a city really improves your life, your community bonds, your time management, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The neighborhood I grew up in felt like that. There was a street a block from my house with a small grocery store, a small drug store, a small variety store, and three corner stores that were open late and sold snacks, very basic groceries, a few deli items, and sandwiches. There was a laundromat and a dry cleaners. Within half a mile or so, there was a shoe repair shop and several restaurants. Within a mile, there was a high school, a junior high school and a few elementary schools, a library, and a post office. There was also a bus stop nearby, and small parks and one large park-like area within walking distance.

Why did you leave?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Man, memories are short here.

I can remember during the throes of the pandemic, how many people were opining about living in an area that isn't so populated with people living on top of each other. I am lucky enough to live in an area like that. Yes, we have to drive a bit to get places, but I wouldn't trade my life of space and greenery and nature with a "15 minute city" ever.

+1
I see zero appeal in living near or even close to a city. No thanks.

The people in rural areas are economically much less productive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm confused why people are so upset. This is about moving people from dense urban hells into smaller towns. A 15 minute city is called a town. And living in a town vs a city really improves your life, your community bonds, your time management, etc.

Not exactly. It is about having people and amenities in proximity, whether a town or a neighborhood of a city...basically anything but suburban residential sprawl.

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The reason this is a conspiracy is because the people behind this agenda won't be living in 15 minute cities themselves. They will continue to live in large houses behind gates and get shuttled around in black SUVs.

Whenever people propose solutions for other people while exempting themselves, it invites this sort of conspiracy thinking.

LOL, the people "behind" this are the leading urbanists in the US and world. They all live in dense urban areas like DC, Cambridge, MA, New Zyork, San Fransciso, London, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm confused why people are so upset. This is about moving people from dense urban hells into smaller towns. A 15 minute city is called a town. And living in a town vs a city really improves your life, your community bonds, your time management, etc.

Because some activists are taking that concept and pushing to eliminate cars and parking. Like with many things nowadays the broad based non-poliyical non-controversial idea gets latched onto by the loud politicized morons in the back and used as a figleaf for their radical and stupid hobbyhorses. These morons then provide the ammunition for others to make it a political issue.

To paraphrase Yeats, the best lack conviction and the worst are full of passionate intensity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm confused why people are so upset. This is about moving people from dense urban hells into smaller towns. A 15 minute city is called a town. And living in a town vs a city really improves your life, your community bonds, your time management, etc.

Because some activists are taking that concept and pushing to eliminate cars and parking. Like with many things nowadays the broad based non-poliyical non-controversial idea gets latched onto by the loud politicized morons in the back and used as a figleaf for their radical and stupid hobbyhorses. These morons then provide the ammunition for others to make it a political issue.

To paraphrase Yeats, the best lack conviction and the worst are full of passionate intensity.

No one is taking away your cars, and it isn't up to government to identify public space to store your car. The bottom line is that for most people under 30, the cost to own, insure and operate a car are prohibitive, and renting or buying a place that adds additional cost for parking is also prohibitive. That is why so many younger people are flocking to cities where the can bike, bus, subway, uber to places as opposed to driving. They are saving close to $10,000 a year in costs.

Cities are responding to that and to the climate crisis.

The bottom line is that we did it the way of an auto-centric country from the 1920's to the 2020's and all it got us was sprawl, more carbon in the air we breathe and a built environment that is generally hostile to humans. There is a reason people love going to old cities in Europe and the middle east, and to the older neighborhoods in the US. They were designed before cars, they stand the test of time, they are walkable and interesting, unlike most of what has been built since 1945.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The neighborhood I grew up in felt like that. There was a street a block from my house with a small grocery store, a small drug store, a small variety store, and three corner stores that were open late and sold snacks, very basic groceries, a few deli items, and sandwiches. There was a laundromat and a dry cleaners. Within half a mile or so, there was a shoe repair shop and several restaurants. Within a mile, there was a high school, a junior high school and a few elementary schools, a library, and a post office. There was also a bus stop nearby, and small parks and one large park-like area within walking distance.

Why did you leave?

My parents divorced, I, eventually, went away to school, the neighborhood changed, and by the time I could have owned the house, I had built a life for myself in NYC that I was very happy with.

[Anonymous]

They want the US to be developed like Tokyo.

They're too stupid to realize this country is way bigger and far less dense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm confused why people are so upset. This is about moving people from dense urban hells into smaller towns. A 15 minute city is called a town. And living in a town vs a city really improves your life, your community bonds, your time management, etc.

Because some activists are taking that concept and pushing to eliminate cars and parking. Like with many things nowadays the broad based non-poliyical non-controversial idea gets latched onto by the loud politicized morons in the back and used as a figleaf for their radical and stupid hobbyhorses. These morons then provide the ammunition for others to make it a political issue.

To paraphrase Yeats, the best lack conviction and the worst are full of passionate intensity.

No one is taking away your cars, and it isn't up to government to identify public space to store your car. The bottom line is that for most people under 30, the cost to own, insure and operate a car are prohibitive, and renting or buying a place that adds additional cost for parking is also prohibitive. That is why so many younger people are flocking to cities where the can bike, bus, subway, uber to places as opposed to driving. They are saving close to $10,000 a year in costs.

Cities are responding to that and to the climate crisis.

The bottom line is that we did it the way of an auto-centric country from the 1920's to the 2020's and all it got us was sprawl, more carbon in the air we breathe and a built environment that is generally hostile to humans. There is a reason people love going to old cities in Europe and the middle east, and to the older neighborhoods in the US. They were designed before cars, they stand the test of time, they are walkable and interesting, unlike most of what has been built since 1945.

Defend the morons however you want but banning cars and parking is electoral suicide.