Majority Of Americans Prefer Sprawl To Walkable Cities

**Rocket** · January-09-25, 10:28 AM

Originally Posted by Richard

I think a true walkability as a concept can only be achieved if one starts from scratch and builds a walkable city from scratch,

They're trying it. They've built them in Europe, China, Dubai etc, etc. But they're all nearly empty. They can't seem to get anyone to move in.

The Leftist professors and philosophers that dream up this stuff are too divorced from reality to understand the downsides. They never seem to factor in human nature, weather or economics in their calculations.

They also presume everyone's time is worth less than $1 per hour. So in their mind, spending 1.5 hours on foot picking up your dry-cleaning, then shopping for groceries and coming back home is totally reasonable.

Their thought is it saves transportation costs. Yet, the increased housing cost alone outweighs that [[as you mentioned), let alone the loss of manufacturing and other wealth generating business.

Sure you save $3k a year in transportation costs, but you loose your backyard, your condo costs $100k more, and you spend 2 hours a day walking instead of getting work done or being with friends and family.

It would be nice if it worked, but outside of some touristy areas, it hasn't.

**southen** · January-09-25, 10:29 AM

Public transit and walkability go hand in hand...

Young generations flock to places like NYC and Chicago and use their transit. You also don't have to walk 20 blocks to get to a market in any place that has true walkability.

You are allowed to prefer cars and can do so without crazy assertions that walkability is impossible due to winters as if there aren't countless examples of where this is achieved.

**canuck** · January-09-25, 10:40 AM

Originally Posted by Richard

my sister used to live in an apartment in Minneapolis,all the buildings were connected,never had to go outside during the winter.

Look at places in Europe like Venice or many other small towns that are considered walkable and are the true definition of walkable cities,because you do have to walk everywhere,and you had better be in good health.

When you figure you can buy a really nice villa for $20k you figure the younger generation would be flocking there,but they are not.

If one has density,then it becomes expensive,and prices the younger generations out and when you get older you are not going to be walking 20 blocks to the market.

I think a true walkability as a concept can only be achieved if one starts from scratch and builds a walkable city from scratch,it’s hard to adapt older American cities that transitioned from walkable,because there were no cars into walkable.

They were never really walkable back then anyways because they had street cars,you walked a couple of blocks and jumped on a street car or like in Detroit the factory was in the neighborhood,so most could walk or bike to work a few blocks away.

It’s more about mobility than walk ability.

You are right about mobility vs walkability. It’s about a variety of options, from sidewalks to bike paths, from subways to underground paths. The more options, the better.

My sons live in a South shore suburb of Montreal, Varennes. From Spring to late Fall, they can leave their cars at home [[they bought a house together) and take a riverboat shuttle that stops in the Eastern end of Montreal Island then onto an Old Montreal dock near downtown. They can then use the rental bike to work and back.

Some city dwellers in Montreal and Toronto access the subway and underground paths directly from their condos, much like Calgary or Minneapolis’ skyway. You could shop for everything downtown without having to go out. There must be at least 10 large malls accessible underground in TO and MTL with ~ 30kms of pedestrian pathways each. In these cases, though, the subway was a prime mover in developing the path infrastucture.

**Zacha341** · January-09-25, 11:41 AM

True. That's their option. But at this point with society and civility degrading as it no lack of car, or amount of money that would put me on a NYC subway. Not until they get their crime and vagrancy tamped down.

I guess I'll not be visiting NY again anytime soon...

...

Originally Posted by southen

Young generations flock to places like NYC and Chicago and use their transit. You also don't have to walk 20 blocks to get to a market in any place that has true walkability.

**southen** · January-09-25, 11:48 AM

Originally Posted by Zacha341

True, that is their option. But there's no lack of car, or amount of money that would put me on a NY subway, until they get their crime tamped down more.

That's great. Conservatives live in fear of everything so that is unsurprising and probably the most honest and accurate reason why that side of the political spectrum seems to decry walkability and public transit.

**Zacha341** · January-09-25, 11:49 AM

Yes. I have used some of our local bike lanes for exercise purposes.

Originally Posted by canuck

You are right about mobility vs walkability. It’s about a variety of options, from sidewalks to bike paths, from subways to underground paths. The more options, the better.

**Zacha341** · January-09-25, 11:57 AM

Why are you bringing up conservatives and fear?

"fear of everything" [?]

That is a old-style straw man argument [call someone a conservative or right-winged if you don't agree with them]. A bit tiresome actually.

Especially tiresome as more black and latino people pivot our responses to policy related to our self interests beyond many broken promises.... well I guess we BE 'conservative'... [sniffle]

We're used to the name calling: bring it on!

This is not about FEAR, it is about apprehending a changing landscape of culture and society. Eyes wide open - not SHUT to those realities. We're not shut away in some far suburbs - shielded.

To the point [towards MORE walkability]: a wide spectrum of Americans [not just repubs] simply want to go about their lives and commutes SAFELY. We want a judicial system that doesn't reward crime. We wish not to be thrown off a subway platform or burned alive publicly.

Don't you? For Your family?

Your loved ones?

Originally Posted by southen

That's great. Conservatives live in fear of everything so that is unsurprising and probably the most honest and accurate reason why that side of the political spectrum seems to decry walkability and public transit.

**canuck** · January-09-25, 12:14 PM

Originally Posted by Zacha341

Why are you bringing up conservatives and fear?

That is a old-style straw man argument [call someone a conservative or right-winged if you don't agree with them]. A bit tiresome actually.

Especially tiresome as more black and latino people pivot our responses to policy related to our self interests beyond many broken promises.... well I guess we BE 'conservative'... [[sniffle)

We're used to the name calling: bring it on!

This is not about FEAR, it is about apprehending a changing landscape of culture and society. Eyes wide open - not SHUT to those realities. We're not shut away in some far suburbs - shielded.

To the point: a wide spectrum of Americans [not just repubs] simply want to go about their lives unharmed. We want a judicial system that does not reward crime. We don't want to be thrown off a subway platform or burned alive they sit.

Do you? Your family?

Your loved ones?

Right. Tell that to survivors of the New Orleans pickup massacre, or the poor souls who died from it. As Richard would say, not everybody dies from a gunshot, it’s not about the weapon, it’s the perpetrator. There were people pushed from subways in NYC from day one, in 1900. The social media now has us connected as if it happened in our backyard.

I never wait for a subway car close to the tracks, I also don’t cross streets on a red light. [[A big white lie)

**Zacha341** · January-09-25, 12:21 PM

^ The same DOES apply to the NO Massacre. This is not an 'either/ or' as you're trying to conflate it to be.

Again: A wide spectrum of Americans [not just repubs] simply want to go about their lives unharmed.

That cannot be not summarized by the phrase "fear of everything"

Sorry.

**Rocket** · January-09-25, 01:58 PM

Originally Posted by canuck

Right. Tell that to survivors of the New Orleans pickup massacre, or the poor souls who died from it.

You bring up a good point about the dangers of walk-able cities.

**southen** · January-09-25, 05:10 PM

Originally Posted by Zacha341

Why are you bringing up conservatives and fear?

"fear of everything" [?]

That is a old-style straw man argument [call someone a conservative or right-winged if you don't agree with them]. A bit tiresome actually.

Especially tiresome as more black and latino people pivot our responses to policy related to our self interests beyond many broken promises.... well I guess we BE 'conservative'... [sniffle]

We're used to the name calling: bring it on!

This is not about FEAR, it is about apprehending a changing landscape of culture and society. Eyes wide open - not SHUT to those realities. We're not shut away in some far suburbs - shielded.

To the point [towards MORE walkability]: a wide spectrum of Americans [not just repubs] simply want to go about their lives and commutes SAFELY. We want a judicial system that doesn't reward crime. We wish not to be thrown off a subway platform or burned alive publicly.

Don't you? For Your family?

Your loved ones?

Your tirade just reiterates what I said. Violent crime is down in this country but you let isolated incidents stoke your fear of the WHOLE idea of walkable cities and public transit. You're the one that brought up a fear of the New York subway and immediately turned it around that apparently this issue is really about broken political promises and a broken judicial system. In any political discussion on this site you fall on the conservative side of the issues, yet calling you conservative is name calling? I think it is an accurate portrayal of your political leanings and views. Nobody likes the idea of being fearful, but its hard not to say that that is what you are when you turned a weird thread about walkability into a discussion about avoiding an entire city because of someone getting set on fire in a subway.

**canuck** · January-09-25, 06:09 PM

Originally Posted by Zacha341

^ The same DOES apply to the NO Massacre. This is not an 'either/ or' as you're trying to conflate it to be.

Again: A wide spectrum of Americans [not just repubs] simply want to go about their lives unharmed.

That cannot be not summarized by the phrase "fear of everything"

Sorry.

No, sorry, but I’m not conflating. I’m not even posing transit, or pedestrianism with the dangers of automotive usage as two sides of the same coin. It’s not as simple. It’s not hypocritical to say; I love driving, I love my car, and by the same token, embrace other forms of mobility.

But where I disagree with you, is that you assign more danger, more terror to the usage of mass transit solutions. Where southen is totally right is when he points to the right’s knee jerk reaction to anything having to do with communal equipment, and the communal spirit. There are millions of people using the NY subway every day. Millions. There are fewer people hurt using public by far than are hurt by driving a car or being hit by one, I’m willing to wager.

Enfin, c’est ce que je pense!

**Zacha341** · January-09-25, 07:32 PM

^ I see what you mean C. Thank you. Love the French! One of my favorite languages.

**canuck** · January-09-25, 08:04 PM

Originally Posted by Zacha341

^ I see what you mean C. Thank you. Love the French! One of my favorite languages.

lol. Pas de problème mon ami!

**Henry Whalley** · January-09-25, 09:15 PM

Why are Americans afraid of bicycle lanes? It seems ideologically based.

**Rocket** · January-10-25, 11:37 AM

Originally Posted by Henry Whalley

Why are Americans afraid of bicycle lanes? It seems ideologically based.

They're not afraid, they just know they're a terrible idea [in cold climates at least) that costs a lot of money to install, makes the roads very confusing, and takes away the parking for businesses, hurting the local economy and the resulting tax base.

Just look at the disaster in Ferndale. The Como's block lost all of their parking. And going north from there, there's like 3 spots in the next 4 blocks. Roughly 0.7 parking spots per block.

I have spoken to a few of the business owners, and perhaps once last year they saw a bicyclist using the lanes.

Not many people rely on bikes to do their errands in Michigan, and those that do go for rides aren't about to do it along a major thoroughfare like Woodward.

Being FOR bikes lanes is ideologically/fantasy based. Being against them is logically / practically based.

**southen** · January-10-25, 12:00 PM

^^^^ Not aware that other cities in cold climates exist and are walkable and bike friendly year round.

**canuck** · January-10-25, 02:42 PM

Originally Posted by southen

^^^^ Not aware that other cities in cold climates exist and are walkable and bike friendly year round.

Exactly, Montreal has expanded snow clearing operations to include cycling paths, and they are now used year round. We have Buffalo level Snowfall here, and people still go out biking. Everything is possible if enough people want it and push for it. The cycling lobby was pushing for it, and they got more space in the city. Scandinavians love their cars as much as North Americans do, and yet, will use other modes more readily than us.

**takascar** · January-10-25, 05:53 PM

Originally Posted by Henry Whalley

I did notice that the U.S. these days is dismayingly like Hitler's Germany. But IMHO Canada would kick our ass in a war. Our kids are stupid, lazy, and addicted. OTOH Trump knows more than the generals. In a few years, Israel will be our only ally. With a friend like that who needs enemies?

Yes, look at the mess that Biden and the neo-Marxist democrats made of our country [[yes, and a lot of uniparty RINOS as well). President Trump will *TRY* to fix it, but things are broken so bad, I wonder if he can.

The lazy / stupid kid thing is also true, that requires the culture to set itself straight. Many Gen-Z's are starting to lean more conservative, at least the males. That's the start - males are the ones who should lead, not females. Females are too concerned with "safety" [[as a result of them having to protect children) and turn the males into sissies. Suffrage was one of the worst thing that has ever happened to the USA.

Women getting into leadership roles gives males [[who should be in those roles) the excuse to shirk their responsibility to lead. That along with the "toxic masculinity" slur makes males ask "Why should I try?". They then sit home playing video games, fail to get married and be Fathers, Protectors, Providers, which is the role that God set out for them. Women, fall for the lie of feminism [[which is just a Marxist tactic to destroy the family), become girl bosses, never get married or have kids, and realize way too late that they have made a mistake. They end up as bitter, resentful and nihilistic witches when they get into their 40's, with their 20 cats and the gallon jug of Chardonnay. To make matters worse, they go hunting for revenge [[I don't blame them for being mad about being conned by Fredan and her minions). They are the ones running the Biden White House, leading an army of screaming purple haired Marxist Karens, fresh out of college with their Critical Race Theory Basket Weaving degrees.

At least President Trump will fire that bunch. The only hope we have is Gen-Z and their realization that they have been lied to.

Women need to take their heroic place as Mother, Giver of Life, Nurturer of Life and men, their place as Father, Protector and Provider. That is the heroic mission that most people carry out in their lives, and the one that the Democrat/Marxist have been trying to destroy forever.

We'll see. If God wants us to heal, we will.

Sad

**Jimaz** · January-10-25, 05:55 PM

Are we having fun yet?

**canuck** · January-10-25, 06:02 PM

Originally Posted by Jimaz

Are we having fun yet?

Lol. He’s on a roll. Dog loves him.

**southen** · January-10-25, 06:06 PM

It would have been a 10/10 if they had roped back in the original topic. My gut when stuff is this stereotypical and on the nose is that it is satire but nope, this person walks amongst us.