Re:Walkable Streets Are More Economically Productive
by jimmaswell on Thursday January 18, 2018 @01:54PM
(#16180112)
You're oversimplifying the economics, elevating one aspect of it above all other considerations. Cost of living doesn't prove that people "want" to live in these areas. What about taxes? Different strictness of regulations? Parking fees? Some may want to, but how many are a captive audience due to their field of work? How many simply have family ties? How many can't afford to take the steps to move out because they're living paycheck to paycheck?
Re:Walkable Streets Are More Economically Productive
by stale2002 on Thursday January 18, 2018 @04:54PM
(#16181869)
I am sure that is true for some people, but is it true for MOST people?
If anything, the examples you give mean that it is even more important to increase density.
This is because, for all of those reasons you mentioned, there are people who need to live in certain areas, but they can't, because they are priced out of the area!
The suburbs take up the majority of the world. If people want to live in low density areas, they can't live literally anywhere.
The problem is that the demand for high density is unfulfilled. Cities take a very small amount of space, when compared to the rest of the living space.
Thusly, there is nothing to lose. Don't want to live in a city? Then don't! You have 99% of the rest of the land to choose from.
If it sucks to live somewhere, you would expect it to be CHEAPER than living in the surrounding area.
But thats not what we see. What we see is that prices in urban areas are pretty much universally higher than living in the surrounding, less dense area?
Do you know what that means? That means that the market has spoken, and it proves that people want to live in these areas, as proven by the fact that they are willing to pay a lot more money to do so.
When it is just as cheap to live in the city as it is to live in low density areas, THEN we can talk about relative demand and the benefits of low density.