> What is wrong with “isolationist individualism”?

The enormous externalities of supporting that lifestyle, whose costs are frequently borne in the form of municipal debt, climate devastation, and by (in net, when everyone demands this and fills in-demand areas with widely spaced housing) reducing the available housing stock.

How? You get energy from solar panels, water from a well, and internet through satellites. What type of remote living are you condemning? Do you have any evidence for this?

Also, I do not understand how someone living further away from a city reduces the housing in a city.

It wouldn't be such a problem if people were willing to accept the simpler, less opulent and lower-impact lifestyle such a housing choice should entail.

Living semi-off grid and with a low environmental impact is possible, but it demands deliberate choices and trade-offs.