Anonymous
Post 05/07/2013 16:11     Subject: Re:Walkability, house size, etc
Anonymous
Post 05/07/2013 16:08     Subject: Walkability, house size, etc
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Well, I actually think we have a societal interest in people not living in huge houses and in not walkable communities. We all pay for those people's choices.


We all SHOULD pay for grammar lessons.


True, I believe in funding public education. Sadly, I find that those taking up the most resources (large house, SUV, chopping down trees to build on exurban lots, one hour solo driving commutes, etc.) are most likely to vote against such funding.
Anonymous
Post 05/07/2013 16:05     Subject: Walkability, house size, etc
Anonymous wrote:Well, I actually think we have a societal interest in people not living in huge houses and in not walkable communities. We all pay for those people's choices.


We all SHOULD pay for grammar lessons.
Anonymous
Post 05/07/2013 16:03     Subject: Walkability, house size, etc
Well, I actually think we have a societal interest in people not living in huge houses and in not walkable communities. We all pay for those people's choices.
Anonymous
Post 05/07/2013 16:02     Subject: Walkability, house size, etc
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Common theme in this forum is for people to discuss walkability. If you don't want it, you are somehow not 'normal'. Additionally, there's house size as in "you don't NEED more than X square feet".

Who determines what someone else needs? Who determines walkability? Why are these things considered desirable? Isn't desirable what works for you? And isn't it possible that what works for you isn't what works for someone else?


Why is "walkability" considered desirable? Why indeed, when you can just waddle out of your mcmansion into your H2 and drive past the cookie-cutter Mcmansions to Appleby's drive through for their gallon of mochachoochoo latte grande with fries? Drive to your mega-church on sundays to pray together with your vacuous neighbors? Then retreat to your basement theater to watch 4 hours of RHNY while scoffing down nachos drenched in kraft cheese?

Who is to say that is wrong?


Sounds terrific.
Anonymous
Post 05/07/2013 16:02     Subject: Walkability, house size, etc
Anonymous wrote:Common theme in this forum is for people to discuss walkability. If you don't want it, you are somehow not 'normal'. Additionally, there's house size as in "you don't NEED more than X square feet".

Who determines what someone else needs? Who determines walkability? Why are these things considered desirable? Isn't desirable what works for you? And isn't it possible that what works for you isn't what works for someone else?


Why is "walkability" considered desirable? Why indeed, when you can just waddle out of your mcmansion into your H2 and drive past the cookie-cutter Mcmansions to Appleby's drive through for their gallon of mochachoochoo latte grande with fries? Drive to your mega-church on sundays to pray together with your vacuous neighbors? Then retreat to your basement theater to watch 4 hours of RHNY while scoffing down nachos drenched in kraft cheese?

Who is to say that is wrong?
Anonymous
Post 05/07/2013 16:00     Subject: Walkability, house size, etc
Anonymous wrote:walkability is a term to make city and close in shit shack dwellers feel better about their small outdated homes.


I actually agree with this, though I wouldn't have put it quite this way.
Anonymous
Post 05/07/2013 15:58     Subject: Walkability, house size, etc
Anonymous wrote:FYI if your home is smaller than 3000 SQRFT and old you are going to make sacrifices to live in the space


seriously, you the most effing obnoxious poster on this forum. get over your obsession with 3000 already!
Anonymous
Post 05/07/2013 15:58     Subject: Walkability, house size, etc
I enjoy walking around my 7000 SQRFT house that's walkable.
Anonymous
Post 05/07/2013 15:57     Subject: Walkability, house size, etc
I'm a suburban dweller who likes to have things walkable and doesn't feel I'm giving up anything to live in my 2000 sf 40 year old home.

I guess I'm not normal either?
Anonymous
Post 05/07/2013 15:51     Subject: Walkability, house size, etc
Anonymous wrote:Common theme in this forum is for people to discuss walkability. If you don't want it, you are somehow not 'normal'. Additionally, there's house size as in "you don't NEED more than X square feet".

Who determines what someone else needs? Who determines walkability? Why are these things considered desirable? Isn't desirable what works for you? And isn't it possible that what works for you isn't what works for someone else?


why post this? Do you feel bad about your choices? I don't recall anyone saying people not interested in walkability are not normal, although I do think that if you are interested in living in DC or close in you are probably interested in walkability, or else you could probably get more for your money elsewhere.
Anonymous
Post 05/07/2013 15:48     Subject: Walkability, house size, etc
FYI if your home is smaller than 3000 SQRFT and old you are going to make sacrifices to live in the space
Anonymous
Post 05/07/2013 15:47     Subject: Walkability, house size, etc
1) http://www.walkscore.com/

2) Everyone has their own housing priorities, and they express them.

Anonymous
Post 05/07/2013 15:47     Subject: Walkability, house size, etc
walkability is a term to make city and close in shit shack dwellers feel better about their small outdated homes.
Anonymous
Post 05/07/2013 15:46     Subject: Walkability, house size, etc
Common theme in this forum is for people to discuss walkability. If you don't want it, you are somehow not 'normal'. Additionally, there's house size as in "you don't NEED more than X square feet".

Who determines what someone else needs? Who determines walkability? Why are these things considered desirable? Isn't desirable what works for you? And isn't it possible that what works for you isn't what works for someone else?