Comments by "" (@kaitlyn__L) on "City Beautiful"
channel.
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@pathtobillions8070 an important facet — that’s how the ones without captive audiences behave. When you factor in geographic proximity to employment, family, education, and so forth, many people can only look in a small area. Prices are already rising for apartments in even middle class areas, without adding anything new or even doing maintenance in some cases. Just raising the price because the rest of the street is doing it. Since pricing is usually done by street and not by the amenities on offer in each building. On the street I live, each building down the street has more units per same size block, and they achieved that by removing more and more storage space from each one. The bottom of the street has twice the units per floor as the top of the street. And because pricing is done by street, they all charge the same. So, you want to live near the top of the street if you can help it, or you’re getting massively ripped off.
2
-
@nunyabidness3075 would you rather go back to how it was before the amendment, or just to have done it differently?
Also I’m half a mile away from a train and wish I was closer! Where I live, properties far away from good public transport are half the cost of well-served ones. Because they’re so popular when they’re available, and businesses spring up around them, and so forth. So I must admit I find the property value temporarily reducing kind of a strange focus, given the rebound and growth afterwards. But I can understand that sometimes the short term effects are far more alarming, just like periods of high inflation.
What exactly do you imagine when you say “bail out” the homeowner? Like with a payment to get building rights and planning permission? That’s exactly what the UK government is doing with HS2, and while it’s inflated the budget (and made it unpopular with some for that reason), the people with stakes in the route are/have been negotiating compensation.
I find interesting that you made that remark about expecting everything for free though — we expect to pay for it with our taxes. (Or indeed, expect our taxes to be spent more responsibly to enable what we’ve already allegedly paid for.) Especially because a lot of these things pay for themselves, and keep economies healthier. It should, IMO, be within everyone’s self-interest to want measures which help society to be more stable and safer and more productive, even if that might look like a few folks here or there get a free ride.
I understand the individualistic impulse to envy anything “unearned”, but even purely self-interested motivations should prefer the big-picture outcomes IMO. I think 100% collectivism and 100% individualism both miss the key fact that we are both simultaneously, we are individuals but we also cooperate and compromise in larger society. And society affects all of us.
To give an example, even if you love driving and are committed to your vintage car (I sure am, I love my 80s and 90s hatchbacks), better public transport is cheaper (in road maintenance etc), improves air quality, reduces congestion, and makes YOUR driving experience way better. Plus it’s nice to have the option of a reliable alternative when the car is in the shop, or you’re stone cold drunk after a birthday celebration.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@JulieWallis1963 I understand it’s a very common thought among sighted people, who aren’t often aware of the accessibility features in modern computers. (Some are really useful for everyone, like extra shortcuts to open apps, or B&W modes, or mono audio for one headphone listening.)
But it’s also SO common an occurrence that it can be frustrating for blind people to keep answering over and over again. (I do try to answer it when I come across it to save them some of the hassle, but of course that’s not possible in this instance lol)
It’s kinda like how the first thing people say when they see my wheelchair is “what’s wrong with (me)?” Most don’t even couch it in a “if you don’t mind” or “if it’s alright to ask”. Literally 90% of the time, that’s the first thing people say to me in a public space.
Lastly, very few blind people are “totally blind”, just as very few deaf people are “totally deaf”. It’s not binary, there’s a gradient, and one becomes legally blind or deaf when the impairment becomes severe enough to affect daily life and require countermeasures. Before eyeglasses were common, even strongly-myopic people were Legally Blind!
2
-
@BonaparteBardithion yeah, not in common parlance. But since we're talking about jaywalking laws, I figured I'd use the strict legal definition of the term instead. Here in the UK it's common to see tiny signs at the edge of people's driveways which has arrows and marks where the "public highway" begins (and, consequently, where the driveway and private land ends). Often they're embedded in the paving, so many don't know they're there until they go looking for them. So, perhaps strangely for you, the times I see the term the most is actually precisely in quiet residential streets. Anything else has a special name: main road, high street, dual carriageway, motorway.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1