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

The Suburbs Will Die: One Man's Fight to Fix the American Dream

time.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 195 posts

Re: The Suburbs Will Die: One Man's Fight to Fix the American Dream

#181

Post by JoeAltmaier »

jarek wrote: post #176
personZ wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As madoc mentioned, sure the strawman you've constructed is a terrible thing. But most suburbs are entirely unlike that. Most aren't gated. Only in very wealthy areas are lawns "huge", and most are minutes with an electric mower. There are sidewalks, and indeed most modern suburbs intermix commercial space such that, at my old suburban house, a giant grocery store was a five minute walk. And where does this "discoura…

Working at home has been the next big sustainability thing for about 30 years now. Why does 90+% of working population still congregate together in offices? Why does YCombinator insist on having everyone in one geographical area and meeting in person often?

Actually its far more efficient to have people work in a common building, than to build an entire edifice for each one to work in. More efficient: work where you live, all together in an ecohabitat of some sort.

Re: The Suburbs Will Die: One Man's Fight to Fix the American Dream

#182

Post by jarek »

personZ wrote: post #180
jarek wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Working at home has been the next big sustainability thing for about 30 years now. Why does 90+% of working population still congregate together in offices? Why does YCombinator insist on having everyone in one geographical area and meeting in person often?

Working at home has been the next big sustainability thing for about 30 years now. The "people tried before" argument is never convincing. Enormous industry changes have occurred (for instance my home has a rock-solid, 100% reliable, 100/10Mbps internet connection, which is better than many whole office buildings had a few years ago), and work at home practices have been exploding. I once was a unique butterfly. Now…

> The "people tried before" argument is never convincing.

Perhaps, but "it'll happen Real Soon Now" isn't either, really.

> I once was a unique butterfly. Now I can name dozens of people who operate just like I do.

You've grown your network! :)

Re: The Suburbs Will Die: One Man's Fight to Fix the American Dream

#183

Post by gangstaplot2 »

pnathan wrote: post #108
lliwta wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think that making a consistent experience absolutely destroys the unique culture and history of places To be fair, the unique culture of the place used to be "industrial farming corn field" is most cases. It's not like anyone is tearing down 100 year old neighborhoods to build big boxes to serve suburbs (actually, the suburbs are far more likely to save those places than destroy them).

> unique culture of the place used to be "industrial farming corn field" is most cases. Ha, yes. But - thought experiment. What if, instead of another 'burb with winding streets, it started out by defining a downtown core kind of setup: 4-6 story buildings with retail storefronts and apartments above. Put the 'extra' space into a commons area, plus maybe a mini-park possibly with original area flora and fauna. So you…

I would live in something like this happily, but for one thing: I have three large dogs. Without a yard, it's a lot of work, and I'd hate to think I couldn't keep a few dogs around.

Re: The Suburbs Will Die: One Man's Fight to Fix the American Dream

#184

Post by chrisweekly »

dublinben wrote: post #112
chrisweekly wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Couldn't agree more, modoc. Also, while prediction is a dangerous game, I foresee the combination of increased investment in public transit, and the advent of affordable driverless cars, adding up to helping suburbs remain a terrific place to grow up. As my hometown (Arlington, MA) was in the 70's and 80's, and as my new adopted town (Duxbury MA) is today. Related tangent: IMHO quality of life is less about urban/sub…

The problem with nice suburbs (Arlington and Duxbury both qualify) is that they're inherently exclusive. They are racially homogeneous, have median incomes at least 25-50% higher than average, and have nothing to offer young adults. I'm incredibly thankful for my privileged upbringing in a similar suburban community, but none of my peers could leave fast enough.

Yeah, the racial homogeneity is the biggest downside in my experience. It's the one thing I really don't like about Duxbury. Wish there were a good solution.

I find the other problems more ambiguous, though. High median income is almost axiomatic: people with means will choose the nicest places to live. That doesn't bother me much at all. It correlates strongly with lower crime and a stronger focus on education. And maybe "nothing to offer young adults" is actually a feature. I think young adults as a rule should leave their hometowns, travel the world, explore and experiment and do brave and foolish things, learn from their mistakes and get some perspective.

I'm not sure any one [kind of] place can be great for families with young children, and for young adults, and be economically and culturally diverse. Absent the option of such a utopia, as the father of two young girls I'm always -- and unapologetically -- going to optimize for proximity to other families with kids, safely walkable/bikeable streets, and excellent schools.

Respectfully, Chris

Re: The Suburbs Will Die: One Man's Fight to Fix the American Dream

#185

Post by tptacek »

rayiner wrote: post #50
zavulon wrote: post #7

I read the entire article, and I guess I missed it - what's the proposed solution?

One of the things that isn't talked about, my guess is because urbanists also tend to be liberals, is reforming welfare policy. States have largely succeeded in, and the federal government has condoned, treating cities as the primary welfare distribution organ. Public housing is mostly built in the cities, most federal school aid goes into the cities, etc. This concentrates the social problems which welfare attempts…

I'm dubious. Urban centers suck down huge welfare dollars, but that's what you'd expect because they have huge populations.

If you read a list of all the federal welfare programs, the only one that sticks out as predominantly "urban" is Section 8. Section 8 is a big program, but it's a rounding error compared to Medicaid, SSDI, and the EITC, which all flow equally to rural areas. Even the food stamp program, which benefits rural households, eclipses HUD and Section 8.

As for education benefits: if you break Title 1 grants down per pupil, it's not the case that the urban states uniformly get more money than the rural ones. North Dakota, for instance, appears to get almost twice as much per pupil as California.

Re: The Suburbs Will Die: One Man's Fight to Fix the American Dream

#186

Post by tptacek »

potatolicious wrote: post #90
modoc wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your vision of a suburb has very little to do with the reality of my suburban existence. It's like someone from the country talking about the horribly dangerous ugly city with its filthy air, roving gangs shooting strangers, and huge rats running in the streets. I'm not saying suburbs are perfect, but you've basically thrown up a stack of strawmen here.

I dunno, I grew up in the suburbs and ufmace summed it up pretty well. My neighborhood wasn't explicitly gated, but the meandering streets with a million dead-ends may as well have been a wrought iron gate. It's pretty obvious to everyone that the nonsensical street layout was designed to keep everyone but residents out. Every house had huge lawns, and because the houses were all built as part of the same subdivision…

Worth mentioning that the meandering streets that annoy people in the suburbs are a classic Christopher Alexander architecture goal. Minimizing cross-town high-speed car traffic is intended to make areas more walkable, shifting the balance from automobiles to humans.

Obviously, suburbs categorically fail to accomplish the strategic goal behind creating windy streets; it's almost impossible to live in one without a car. Suburban city planners probably were not inspired by Alexander. But they are safer places for kids to play in the streets than Chicago blocks, where residents often lobby for speed bumps to deal with speeding cars.

Suburbs bad. Windy streets? Maybe not so much.

Re: The Suburbs Will Die: One Man's Fight to Fix the American Dream

#187

Post by personZ »

jarek wrote: post #182
personZ wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Working at home has been the next big sustainability thing for about 30 years now. The "people tried before" argument is never convincing. Enormous industry changes have occurred (for instance my home has a rock-solid, 100% reliable, 100/10Mbps internet connection, which is better than many whole office buildings had a few years ago), and work at home practices have been exploding. I once was a unique butterfly. Now…

> The "people tried before" argument is never convincing. Perhaps, but "it'll happen Real Soon Now" isn't either, really. > I once was a unique butterfly. Now I can name dozens of people who operate just like I do. You've grown your network! :)

Perhaps, but "it'll happen Real Soon Now" isn't either, really.

It is happening for me right now: My commute is to walk down my stairs. A moment ago I finished a teleconference with a group of distributed people thousands of miles away.

Even just looking at tools -- we once went to a central location because it had the tools necessary for work, and even as we computerized we had the desktop on the corporate LAN, etc. Communications was limited and often very expensive.

Now we all roll around with mobiles and laptops, with mobile workability that allows us to work virtually anywhere with equal ease.

It is happening for many other people right now. The "giant office" model is one that some companies still pursue, but many others are going to flexible or work at home models. And for people like me it means that I can live on acres in the countryside.

Re: The Suburbs Will Die: One Man's Fight to Fix the American Dream

#188

Post by jarek »

personZ wrote: post #187
jarek wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The "people tried before" argument is never convincing. Perhaps, but "it'll happen Real Soon Now" isn't either, really. > I once was a unique butterfly. Now I can name dozens of people who operate just like I do. You've grown your network! :)

Perhaps, but "it'll happen Real Soon Now" isn't either, really. It is happening for me right now : My commute is to walk down my stairs. A moment ago I finished a teleconference with a group of distributed people thousands of miles away. Even just looking at tools -- we once went to a central location because it had the tools necessary for work, and even as we computerized we had the desktop on the corporate LAN, etc…

> It is happening for me right now

Yes, but for 90+% of the working population it is not happening right now, nor real soon.

> The "giant office" model is one that some companies still pursue

For values of "some" approaching "vast majority".

It's great that some people are able to work remotely now, and more will be able to do later. It will help the environment and generally be a good thing. But in most companies in most industries, this will not happen any time soon. It just isn't happening. Neither the hippest everything-aaS startups nor the most staid dinosaurs are eschewing coming into a common office en masse. There's no inflection point. Internet connections are faster and more reliable than ever, but so are the traffic jams at rush hour.

We've had more adoption rolling out whole new models of housing with 2.0 "walkable" suburbs than with working remotely.

Re: The Suburbs Will Die: One Man's Fight to Fix the American Dream

#189

Post by personZ »

jarek wrote: post #188
personZ wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps, but "it'll happen Real Soon Now" isn't either, really. It is happening for me right now : My commute is to walk down my stairs. A moment ago I finished a teleconference with a group of distributed people thousands of miles away. Even just looking at tools -- we once went to a central location because it had the tools necessary for work, and even as we computerized we had the desktop on the corporate LAN, etc…

> It is happening for me right now Yes, but for 90+% of the working population it is not happening right now, nor real soon. > The "giant office" model is one that some companies still pursue For values of "some" approaching "vast majority". It's great that some people are able to work remotely now, and more will be able to do later. It will help the environment and generally be a good thing. But in most companies in…

Given that you oddly brought up ycombinator's habits (which accounts for approximately 0% of the workforce), you seem to be emotionally invested in this idea.

But as someone who works remotely, and who works with a large number of people who work remotely a good portion of the time, and an increasing number who work remotely the vast majority of the time, I will say that you are simply wrong. I mean, completely wrong. Even staid old corporations like banks and insurance companies are introducing multiple days of working at home policies for all level of employees. This is not some strange new thing, it is simply happening.

Re: The Suburbs Will Die: One Man's Fight to Fix the American Dream

#190

Post by jarek »

personZ wrote: post #189
jarek wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It is happening for me right now Yes, but for 90+% of the working population it is not happening right now, nor real soon. > The "giant office" model is one that some companies still pursue For values of "some" approaching "vast majority". It's great that some people are able to work remotely now, and more will be able to do later. It will help the environment and generally be a good thing. But in most companies in…

Given that you oddly brought up ycombinator's habits (which accounts for approximately 0% of the workforce), you seem to be emotionally invested in this idea. But as someone who works remotely, and who works with a large number of people who work remotely a good portion of the time, and an increasing number who work remotely the vast majority of the time, I will say that you are simply wrong . I mean, completely wron…

I brought up YC as a lot of people on HN hold it in high esteem and look up to it for inspiration and leading-edge best practices about running businesses. Obviously not everyone.

It also appears our discussion has ended up as generalizations vs anecdotes. Sorry about that.

Post reply on HN