Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What’s hilarious to me is that these “YIMBY” people think that rich people are just going to go along with their nonsense. No, I’ll just move somewhere else, so will the vast majority of my neighbors, and the neighborhood’s property values will plummet. It will become a deserted, crime-ridden hellhole overnight. Look at Baltimore, St. Louis, Memphis and Detroit as warning signs.

Uh, the truly rich people live in the cities. It is the faux McMansion type wannabees that live in Loudoun County

Anonymous wrote:“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.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What’s hilarious to me is that these “YIMBY” people think that rich people are just going to go along with their nonsense. No, I’ll just move somewhere else, so will the vast majority of my neighbors, and the neighborhood’s property values will plummet. It will become a deserted, crime-ridden hellhole overnight. Look at Baltimore, St. Louis, Memphis and Detroit as warning signs.

Uh, the truly rich people live in the cities. It is the faux McMansion type wannabees that live in Loudoun County

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Density causes crime.

Then why is crime per capita much higher in rural red states?

Anonymous wrote:What’s hilarious to me is that these “YIMBY” people think that rich people are just going to go along with their nonsense. No, I’ll just move somewhere else, so will the vast majority of my neighbors, and the neighborhood’s property values will plummet. It will become a deserted, crime-ridden hellhole overnight. Look at Baltimore, St. Louis, Memphis and Detroit as warning signs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“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.

So basically cul de sac street patters force people to drive more, and also to stymie walking as you can't get from one place to another without going though someone's yard. Grid patterns are MUCH more efficient.
Lacking sidewalks means it is less safe for pedestrians or little kids on bikes.
Lack of public traffic means people have to drive. From an equity standpoint, it is simply more expensive thus shutting out people who can't even consider living there.
Few commercial establishments means you have to basically drive everywhere everytime you need anything.

It is an incredibly wasteful and unsustainable way of life if you actually think about it.

I mean, if OP likes it, then OP likes it. There's no arguing with taste. It's terrible public policy, but OP likes it!

Define “terrible public policy.” I think that destroying nature to build say, subsidized housing, anywhere except in unused buildings in DC or close-in is terrible for the environment.

Exactly Jiwanka would you propose to house a growing population?

It’s not my job to “house” you.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What’s hilarious to me is that these “YIMBY” people think that rich people are just going to go along with their nonsense. No, I’ll just move somewhere else, so will the vast majority of my neighbors, and the neighborhood’s property values will plummet. It will become a deserted, crime-ridden hellhole overnight. Look at Baltimore, St. Louis, Memphis and Detroit as warning signs.

Win-win.

Anonymous wrote:Density causes crime.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What’s hilarious to me is that these “YIMBY” people think that rich people are just going to go along with their nonsense. No, I’ll just move somewhere else, so will the vast majority of my neighbors, and the neighborhood’s property values will plummet. It will become a deserted, crime-ridden hellhole overnight. Look at Baltimore, St. Louis, Memphis and Detroit as warning signs.

Win-win.

Anonymous wrote:What’s hilarious to me is that these “YIMBY” people think that rich people are just going to go along with their nonsense. No, I’ll just move somewhere else, so will the vast majority of my neighbors, and the neighborhood’s property values will plummet. It will become a deserted, crime-ridden hellhole overnight. Look at Baltimore, St. Louis, Memphis and Detroit as warning signs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“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.

So basically cul de sac street patters force people to drive more, and also to stymie walking as you can't get from one place to another without going though someone's yard. Grid patterns are MUCH more efficient.
Lacking sidewalks means it is less safe for pedestrians or little kids on bikes.
Lack of public traffic means people have to drive. From an equity standpoint, it is simply more expensive thus shutting out people who can't even consider living there.
Few commercial establishments means you have to basically drive everywhere everytime you need anything.

It is an incredibly wasteful and unsustainable way of life if you actually think about it.

Sounds awesome.

poor people will be shut out from lots of things in life; that’ doesn’t make those things inherently bad. Should we close all fine dining establishments because they are inequitable and poor people can’t dine there?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“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.

So basically cul de sac street patters force people to drive more, and also to stymie walking as you can't get from one place to another without going though someone's yard. Grid patterns are MUCH more efficient.
Lacking sidewalks means it is less safe for pedestrians or little kids on bikes.
Lack of public traffic means people have to drive. From an equity standpoint, it is simply more expensive thus shutting out people who can't even consider living there.
Few commercial establishments means you have to basically drive everywhere everytime you need anything.

It is an incredibly wasteful and unsustainable way of life if you actually think about it.

Sounds awesome.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“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.

So basically cul de sac street patters force people to drive more, and also to stymie walking as you can't get from one place to another without going though someone's yard. Grid patterns are MUCH more efficient.
Lacking sidewalks means it is less safe for pedestrians or little kids on bikes.
Lack of public traffic means people have to drive. From an equity standpoint, it is simply more expensive thus shutting out people who can't even consider living there.
Few commercial establishments means you have to basically drive everywhere everytime you need anything.

It is an incredibly wasteful and unsustainable way of life if you actually think about it.

The only people who drive around my neighborhood are people who live here. Not much traffic by our house.

Having “few commercial establishments” restricts conspicuous consumption. I don’t want or need a coffee shop anywhere near me; those just burn a hole in people’s pockets. Oh, and they exploit their employees along the way.

I don’t care that “I have to drive” to certain places. If I did care, I’d live elsewhere.

As for making land more expensive, well, there is a reason why high schools in Loudoun County, where some kids are bussed 40 minutes to school, have better test scores than schools in inner DC.

Ok, and there you have it. People are different. So I live in a walkable neighborhood (mostly - grocery stores require driving) with diverse schools and a less wealthy population than Loudoun. We care about different things!

Great, so leave my neighborhood alone and I’ll pay the same respect to yours.