DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**Serereids** · 02-05-2007, 04:57 PM

Ummmmmm, no.

You guys are calling for the urbinization of all areas in an effort to make things more efficient which ignores the fact that no matter how dense you pack the people, you will still be using more than you can handle.

What we need is to find a balance point. Clustering of humans does not work to well on a global scale. People are pack animals and get rather itchy when you pack too many of them together for too long.

You can deny it by siting many large cities that ave not spontaneously combusted, but you can also site increased crime rates when compared to similar less dense areas composed of the same average financial demographic.

I think that we DO need setbacks, and regulations as to densities, but at the same time find a way to prevent the "development" mentality that you can make a bunch of cul-de-sac little twisty roads to stick a bunch of McMansions on so close together that you can say Hi to your neighbor just by looking out your side window and taping on theirs.

IF, of course, they built side windows into these things anymore.

I do think they need to look at the "villa" kind of development that I believe Cali has tried in some areas where you have some of the things you need within WALKING DISTANCE of your home reducing the need to jump in the Suburban Suburban to go get some OJ for breakfast.

But to add to that, which Cali is WOEFULLY insufficient, we need to increase public transportation availability, convenience, and UTILITY! It is one thing to have a train station within walking distance. It is another to only have 1 train evey 45 minutes (or longer later) OR have it take you longer to get in by mass transit than to drive your car into work.

We need to make these systems handy and less centralized. Major arteries ned to go to the heart (NYC) but who says we cant have some lines that would be able to get from A to B (right next door) without having to go to NYC to get there?

As for power, we have so many options, but people just do not like them. The tidal generators in LI sound would be one example. The resident$ there giving the rea$on that it would di$rupt their $ailing. People worrying more about birds being hit by windmills than the ecological damage done by the current methods.

There are SO MANY reasons why we are facing these problems, but turning the country into a bunch of little people-nodes is not a viable solution.

We need to look around and find out why areas like Europe actually have DECLINING populations while our horny little residents keep popping them out like bunnies. What made europe hit their equilibrium point? How can we try to get there ourselves before we blow right past it and feel the reprocussions from the backswing?

How can we get a balance to occur again?

02-05-2007, 04:57 PM	#13
Serereids Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 423 Senior Member	Ummmmmm, no. You guys are calling for the urbinization of all areas in an effort to make things more efficient which ignores the fact that no matter how dense you pack the people, you will still be using more than you can handle. What we need is to find a balance point. Clustering of humans does not work to well on a global scale. People are pack animals and get rather itchy when you pack too many of them together for too long. You can deny it by siting many large cities that ave not spontaneously combusted, but you can also site increased crime rates when compared to similar less dense areas composed of the same average financial demographic. I think that we DO need setbacks, and regulations as to densities, but at the same time find a way to prevent the "development" mentality that you can make a bunch of cul-de-sac little twisty roads to stick a bunch of McMansions on so close together that you can say Hi to your neighbor just by looking out your side window and taping on theirs. IF, of course, they built side windows into these things anymore. I do think they need to look at the "villa" kind of development that I believe Cali has tried in some areas where you have some of the things you need within WALKING DISTANCE of your home reducing the need to jump in the Suburban Suburban to go get some OJ for breakfast. But to add to that, which Cali is WOEFULLY insufficient, we need to increase public transportation availability, convenience, and UTILITY! It is one thing to have a train station within walking distance. It is another to only have 1 train evey 45 minutes (or longer later) OR have it take you longer to get in by mass transit than to drive your car into work. We need to make these systems handy and less centralized. Major arteries ned to go to the heart (NYC) but who says we cant have some lines that would be able to get from A to B (right next door) without having to go to NYC to get there? As for power, we have so many options, but people just do not like them. The tidal generators in LI sound would be one example. The resident$ there giving the rea$on that it would di$rupt their $ailing. People worrying more about birds being hit by windmills than the ecological damage done by the current methods. There are SO MANY reasons why we are facing these problems, but turning the country into a bunch of little people-nodes is not a viable solution. We need to look around and find out why areas like Europe actually have DECLINING populations while our horny little residents keep popping them out like bunnies. What made europe hit their equilibrium point? How can we try to get there ourselves before we blow right past it and feel the reprocussions from the backswing? How can we get a balance to occur again?
	Quote