Toggle navigation
Toggle navigation
Home
DCUM Forums
Nanny Forums
Events
About DCUM
Advertising
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
FAQs and Guidelines
Privacy Policy
Your current identity is: Anonymous
Login
Preview
Subject:
Forum Index
»
Metropolitan DC Local Politics
Reply to "Why do “YIMBY” urban planners, bloggers & activists constantly cite what they believe are "
Subject:
Emoticons
More smilies
Text Color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Violet
White
Black
Font:
Very Small
Small
Normal
Big
Giant
Close Marks
[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]“disadvantages” of living in the suburbs? When in reality, they’re precisely the reasons that people CHOOSE to live in the suburbs? I for one, LIKE that my neighborhood has streets you can’t drive through, lacks sidewalks, lacks public transit, has big yards and is mostly houses with few commercial establishments. I don’t want to be able to walk to a bar or 7-eleven, and I don’t want anyone walking from those places to walk through my neighborhood. [/quote] Because they feel that the preference for the suburbs is objectively wrong, and vociferously making the case will make them feel justified in their increasingly aggressive efforts to impose their own preferences on people. [/quote] Objectively, low density, car-dependent, residential-only, cul-de-sac neighborhoods are a disaster for the environment, local government budgets, and societal well-being. However, if that's what you prefer, that's not objectively wrong. How can a preference be objectively anything? Your feelings are your feelings.[/quote] Just because you say the word “objectively” does not make it true. Here is a study that demonstrates that downtown Helsinki residents have more carbon intensive lifestyles than their suburban counterparts. https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/6/3/034034/pdf Consumption based emissions are very real and it turns out significantly more important than transportation emissions for household GHG emissions. [/quote] That study is from 2011. I think things have changed a little since then, no?[/quote] What proof do you have to refute the findings?[/quote] What proof do you have that they haven’t? Or are you hanging your hat on one 13 year old study in a small Scandinavian country? Try his is really the only study you could find? That speaks volumes. [/quote]
Options
Disable HTML in this message
Disable BB Code in this message
Disable smilies in this message
Review message
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics