Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Our self imposed scarcity of nice places

strongtowns.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 564 posts

Re: Our self imposed scarcity of nice places

#281

Post by bretthoerner »

jseban wrote: post #241
globular-toast wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Motorised traffic, and cars in particular, are prioritised over non-motorised traffic everywhere I've been in the world, including Stockholm. The problem is cultural. You see, motorised traffic wins by default, unless there are strict rules to stop that happening. If you think about a street full of pedestrians, some will be quicker and stronger than others, but it's not OK for them to use their might to take priorit…

> The problem is cultural. You see, motorised traffic wins by default, unless there are strict rules to stop that happening. It's not cultural, motorized traffic wins because it's more powerful. > Right now a child is being taught to give way to cars because if they don't the car will kill them. Vehicles with enclosed cabs like cars are the worst because the drivers are completely removed from the road. Their experie…

Subways, trams and buses are not just as dangerous as cars.

Re: Our self imposed scarcity of nice places

#282

Post by nuerow »

thow-58d4e8b wrote: post #106
hendiatris wrote: post #10

I read this and think “ah, well there are many more non-rich people so the density requirements make this sort of thing complicated” and then I look out the window over the European city I live in where it has been achieved. Then I think about the town an hour away with a vibrant community and pleasant human-scale environment. What makes it all possible? Good transit. Clean buses. The US simply doesn’t have that, and…

I'm afraid it's not simply about political will. To have affordable and safe public transport, one would need to completely revamp the fabric of American society Why is there no public transport? Because it's losing money due to low ridership. Why is the ridership low? Because people are afraid of dangerous neighborhoods, wackos, homeless and other people of lower castes. Why all of these factors? Because of massive…

> Why is there no public transport? Because it's losing money due to low ridership. Why is the ridership low?

This certainly is not it, because public transportation is in general a public service whose main output is not turning a profit but positive externalities that boil down to quality of life. Consequently, there are plenty of cities around the world where their public transportation network is subsidized to the point where the service is completely free to use.

Let's put things in perspective: in the US, Texas wasted close to $3B dollars to expand a highway to a whopping 26 lanes[1]. Wouldn't it be far better if that cash was instead used to put together a commuter railway service that serves the same route, or even in Houston's appallingly tiny light rail network[2]?

[1] https://www.cntraveler.com/story/the-worlds-widest-highway-s...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/METRORail

Re: Our self imposed scarcity of nice places

#283

Post by CapitainEvident »

jseban wrote: post #237
llampx wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did he buy or rent the apartment recently and from his own savings+income? Many such stories involve an old rental contract, a family-owned apartment or sizeable inheritance.

Yep, and commonly also a loan from parents for downpayment to buy.

Not a lack of 75-100 m2 (3 bedrooms) under €600,000 in walking distance from the most famous tourist attractions, I know as I looked.

Smaller 2 bedrooms can be bought in the center of Amsterdam for €350,000 with a €35,000 deposit (10%).

How is that not viable for a tech worker?

Re: Our self imposed scarcity of nice places

#284

Post by ChuckNorris89 »

dvdkon wrote: post #267
nivenkos wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even FAANG pays shit in Europe. I was paid 75k at Amazon. Europe is designed for the landed aristocracy, not working people.

I recall housing prices being mostly reasonable 15-20 years ago, I don't think our current woes are the result of any "design".

>I recall housing prices being mostly reasonable 15-20 years ago

And bitcoin was a fraction of a dollar just 10 years ago. Unfortunately, we don't have a time machine and the housing prices of today have far outpaced the earning increases that the working class saw in that time.

15-20 years ago, housing was seen mostly as a place you'd buy to live yourself, not an investment vehicle you'd buy to get grand returns from. That's the difference.

Re: Our self imposed scarcity of nice places

#285

Post by ensignavenger »

kubb wrote: post #213
easytiger wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it's so easy, do it yourself then? Who do you think funds the building and maintenance of property?

The people who rent it after its built, duh? Not everyone can buy property because not everyone is sitting on unallocated capital.

Housing cooperatives are a thing, most people don't seem very interested, but if you are, you can certainly get some other like-minded individuals together and start one!

Re: Our self imposed scarcity of nice places

#286

Post by dsauerbrun »

swiley wrote: post #255
CalRobert wrote: post #21

The planet boils because Americans are afraid of living in places as beautiful as the ones they vacation in. If you're an American who'd like to escape, check out the Dutch American Friendship Treaty, or Portugal's new visa for remote work. PT's NHR tax program makes it very popular for FIRE too. It's not Amsterdam but moving to Dublin from LA did wonders for my happiness. The next goal is living somewhere my kid can…

China and India emit far more CO2 than we do.

per Capita?

Re: Our self imposed scarcity of nice places

#287

Post by fsflover »

swiley wrote: post #255
CalRobert wrote: post #21

The planet boils because Americans are afraid of living in places as beautiful as the ones they vacation in. If you're an American who'd like to escape, check out the Dutch American Friendship Treaty, or Portugal's new visa for remote work. PT's NHR tax program makes it very popular for FIRE too. It's not Amsterdam but moving to Dublin from LA did wonders for my happiness. The next goal is living somewhere my kid can…

China and India emit far more CO2 than we do.

So what?

Re: Our self imposed scarcity of nice places

#288

Post by barrenko »

nivenkos wrote: post #160
ChuckNorris89 wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, that US viewpoint kinda irks me too. Of course Europe is cheap when you earn US tech salaries. Amsterdam is definitely not cheap on your average non-FAANG/IB local Dutch wages.

Even FAANG pays shit in Europe. I was paid 75k at Amazon. Europe is designed for the landed aristocracy, not working people.

Europe is a museum.

Re: Our self imposed scarcity of nice places

#289

Post by pfranz »

bambax wrote: post #104
scandox wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Think the double question mark is a tad disingenuous there. Everyone will have their own peculiar circumstances. We, for example, are a family of 4 and our shop for ten days is I would guess 30/40 kilograms. The grocery is 2.5 kilometers away and the journey includes one very dangerous roundabout. So I think a car is reasonable.

Ok, maybe the question should be: how often do you buy groceries. We buy most things fresh and do it every day. If we shopped once every ten days then yes, it wouldn't work.

I think that's a huge factor generally between cities and not. If you shop every 10 days you also need a large amount of space to store it. I've also noticed if I can shop every day I'm less sensitive to inventory issues. If they're out of milk today, I'll get it tomorrow. If I won't be back for 10 days, we either go without or I need to make another stop and I'm less likely to shop there.

Re: Our self imposed scarcity of nice places

#290

Post by CalRobert »

nivenkos wrote: post #164
CalRobert wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This might be useful to you - trimodal nature of comp in NL. https://blog.pragmaticengineer.com/software-engineering-sala...

In my experience, it's bullshit. The author must be conflating staff positions with "senior". I was paid 75k as an L5 engineer at Amazon, that's like intermediate senior (two levels down from Staff). So maybe one level up you'd get 100-110k? I've never seen salaries anywhere close to that article. Even contractors might pay $150k (and then you have to pay your own taxes, insurance, etc. out of that).

I am a senior dev (not staff, not even senior 2) and I make more than that. But I work remote for a US company - maybe investigate options there?
Post reply on HN