Comments by "Logan S" (@logans3365) on "The Case Against Single-Family Zoning" video.

Single family homes? They all look the same, pretty ugly usually.
9
You like having to get in a car every time you need to buy anything? I’d rather be able to walk downstairs to the grocery store under my 5 story building.
6
Suburbs are heavily subsidized by federal grants, if you actually had to pay for your own infrastructure then you probably wouldn’t be able to afford to live in a suburb. Also street parking isn’t a problem if you have dense neighborhoods that can actually support public transit. Saving lots of space and money
4
@johndone8045 and where does the government get their tax money from? Suburbs are a drain on society, taking money away from things it would be better spent on. You can always go live out in the country off grid, cities are for people, if you don’t like people then cities are not for you.
4
@johndone8045 suburbs being great at spreading people out ends up being the main problem actually, due to the previously mentioned more infrastructure needed for the far apart homes, and less families paying taxes to maintain it. If you wish to live spread far apart form everyone, then don’t live in a city.
4
⁠ @LongNguyen-ho9qf to so blatantly speak down on people who are less fortunate then yourself, is a true testament to how out of touch suburbians are with the world. You have socially exiled yourself, and it’s having terrible compounding effects through the generations. Your lack of empathy could doom the world.
4
They are already out of reach for a lot of the “middle class” (there is only worker and owner class, the middle class idea was made to divide the worker class so the owner class has more power) Who cares if single family homes are expensive if there is affordable housing for everyone?
3
You didn’t really touch on the most important argument against single family zoning, which is that suburbs are currently heavily subsidized by federal grants to build and maintain the infrastructure, if people actually had to foot the bill for their own infrastructure, then most people living in the suburbs now wouldn’t be able to afford to stay. Denser housing has less infrastructure that is supporting more people so it’s actually sustainable.
3
Math does not affect the people opposing public transport, if it did then they would not be opposed to it. They are driven only by emotion, no logic remains.
2
I live in a suburb unfortunately, and I can’t even start a garden to grow food to eat, definitely not freedom, at least if there was more dense housing available (for sale not for rent) I would have a cheaper mortgage.
1
Suburbs are definitely broken, the problem is just hidden behind federal subsidies for cities to maintain the unsustainable suburbs, if suburbs had to pay for all their own infrastructure, then most people living there now wouldn’t be able to afford to stay.
1
@Арчи-д5т you literally used the word mumbo jumbo. Which part of the comment are you having trouble understanding?
1
@Арчи-д5т you continue to provide nothing to this conversation, resorting to insults to cover your lack of a counter argument.
1
@Арчи-д5т the infrastructure within suburbs cost more to maintain then the residence produce in taxes due to low density. As of now those repairs are subsidized by the parts of the city that actually bring in more tax revenue then their expenses (how we should build things), to pay for the suburbs that bring in less tax revenue then their expenses. And when those areas are not enough, then they get grants from the federal level, again taking money away from things it would be better spent on the roads for only 5-50 houses. I apologize, knowing what I know, the first comment makes perfect sense, but I can see how it would be confusing if you were unaware of the issue I was referring to. I can link some videos that can explain it much better then I can in a comment if you would like.
1
@Арчи-д5т there’s a lot wrong with what you said, but I grow tired of explaining it, and seeing as you have stated you are not in America, and this are no immediate threat to the police’s I plan to Implement, I suggest we simply save ourselves some time and end this debate. I can’t wait to hear a snarky comment about how you have won and I can’t defend my argument 🤣 sure
1
The loud neighbors part could be easily solved with better build quality. But we live under capitalism where everything is built as poorly as possible, and sold for as much as possible.
1
@Joskemom or you could use all the money you saved on production to destroy your competition through other means. Also most consumers by the cheapest option available because wages are so low, meaning whoever builds stuff the worst usually wins. Take a look around at the quality of our products and tell me they are not all garbage compared to what they could be.
1
Single family homes would be even more expensive in the same spots because there would be less homes. The problem of the housing crises is a result of capitalism, which allows greedy business men to turn homes people need into commodities, internationally driving up the price for profit, while people who need homes suffer.
1
An apartment with a nearby park, and good school system is way better for child development then a single family home. Children in single family homes need their mommy to drive them anywhere they need to go, and there are a lot less other children to interact with them in denser housing so the kids grow up with social issues, as well as dependency issues form lack of independence.
1
Right now suburbs don’t make enough in taxes to pay for their own infrastructure, their infrastructure is subsidized by denser areas. If suburbs actually had to pay for all their own infrastructure then most people wouldn’t be able to afford to live there anymore. And there would be money to develop the denser areas with parks and public transport.
1
Like he said, a lot of the things you are complaining about are not related the way you make them out to be.
1