Comments by "LancesArmorStriking" (@LancesArmorStriking) on "City Beautiful" channel.

@MrBlancify I think it should be mentioned that white farmers in particular are the ones at risk, not urban residents. And most attacks are done for money, not race, because the farm workers (who are usually black) are also attacked.
152
Paul Tello Lol I see the 1800's are alive and well on YouTube. No matter how bad you wanna control people, it's still gonna happen. "Race-mixing" has always occurred, and will continue to. Tough shit If it's degenerate, then Thomas Jefferson was especially degenerate.
61
@LucasFernandez-fk8se "Nice as heck" ok boomer That's also wrong- denser housing is cheaper to build, and the crisis is caused by there not being enough space in areas where people work. You can only build suburbs so far out before commute times become impossible to deal with. We need mixed use zoning near cities, not more boring suburbs. Ridiculous.
15
@maxant4285 How exactly? It was built from nothing and planned completely. That's not common at all.
14
@Dave_Sisson Sure, but rest assured there will be Chinese for many more centuries or millenia. The Vikings are no longer around, which makes the carving a preservation of something no longer replaceable. Also, it's a rare instance. There are so many Chinese that if carving your name into shit gets popular among them, they will ruin everything. It'll be more of an archaeological layer than a single artifact.
13
@notsure6187 "For some reason" The great climate, economic prosperity (via Silicon Valley), historic monuments, and generally people-friendly layout (contrast with most of Texas, for instance) are pretty good reasons, I'd say. Outside of New York City, it's the only place in the U.S. that resembles the rest of the world, design-wise. Old people haven't gotten their clammy fingers onto it fast enough to demand residential (and nothing else!!!) housing. So much of America could have been great places to live if your building laws weren't stuck in the '50s. SF might not even have been as crowded.
11
Chris Christian No, they care about their nationality, or culture. The exception is America, where you so thoroughly destroyed the African cultures of the people you enslaved that they had to create a new one- "black" culture. Same with other groups. Asian groups were marginalized, though not enslaved, so while they have their culture, they still all identify as 'Asian American.' Polish people care about Polish culture. Scots care about Scottish culture. Italians care about Italian culture. What the fuck is "white" culture? Yoga and Starbucks? Playing videogames? Fucking your cousin? There is no unifying experience that binds white Americans together. The Puritans that created you hated song an dance, which is why there is no "white" music- every single American genre comes from black people. There are no common expressions, ideas, or traditions. Because America is not about those. You come here to shed them, and create something new and different.
5
Not sure how Americans go about it, but Europeans tend to stay at a fixed density per square meter. What that means, in real life, is that (for example): to reach optimal density, you could do two things- build 3/5-story houses next to each other, with a little bit of greenspace in between each, or opt for 10/12-story "high-rises," but space them farther apart, and add lots of greenery in between. Although, designed well, I think that even multiple 10-story buildings lined up could work fine, too. There is a reason most people want to go to big cities, after all. It's not money, because property values have soared, and yet people still flock. Why? There are loads of people and masses of things for everyone to experience!
5
That'll take a while. Cars have an enormous infrastructure behind them, and re-purposing roads will take more money and patience than most people have.
5
@burgerman101 Username checks out lmfao
4
@artcurious807 I agree! We should try that, but if I'm being honest, I wouldn't hold my breath. Most politicians already do that, if not through business or diplomatic visits then through expensive vacations. The real issue is, they see the world in a different way. How to explain it?.. Because they've likely been raised rich, or have at least gotten used to the lifestyle, they don't think on the same scale as the average person. If there's a problem with one region of the world, they aren't forced by circumstance to stay and think about how that region could fix it long-term. Instead, they'll just fly somewhere else. Is D.C. too lifeless? I'll just go to Paris! "Problem solved!" To them, sprawl isn't a problem because it doesn't have an impact on their lives, and they don't experience it nearly as often as we do. So I don't think exposure tp better infrastructure would help. They'd already see it through the lens of, "this is one of those places that is charming, and getting to it is no problem for me." What we need to do (sorry in advance if you're on the political right) is change the conservative attitude towards housing, like NIMBYs and very autocentric zoning codes. Also, repeal Citizens United. Once corporations' hands are cut off, they won't be able to persuade those of us less-educated, to reduce the profits of automakers and suburban developers, by encouraging more sustainable mixed-use housing. But sadly, hell will freeze over before that's wrestled from the grip of almost literally every company in the U.S.. So I comment on YouTube to numb the pain.. :(
3
I think a country with no stake in the game, so to speak, should host the Olympics. Tahiti, Niue, or even Cyprus come to mind. Or, a country could volunteer to become a 'sacrificial lamb' of sorts, hosting but not participating in the Olympics of the year in question (or at all).
3
I wouldn't necessarily consider a city design "bad" just because it doesn't accomodate cars. If it has good enough public transport, or is simply dense enough, then it functions as it should. Cars are great for long trips, especially if you just want to joyride, but public transport is best for smaller distances (which is the majority of travel to begin with).
3
@IkeOkerekeNews No, truth. America is spread out and its public transport is garbage. Its cities are dirty and they're surrounded with boring suburbs. Where are the lies? Which part of my statement is untrue to you?
2
@IkeOkerekeNews You fell for it! Subjective statements can neither be truth nor lies. So, you're still wrong. Sorry.
2
@IkeOkerekeNews Also, here: https://www.infrastructurereportcard.org/cat-item/transit/ https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_and_dependencies_by_population_density https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2015/cb15-33.html Bad public transport, sparsely populated, and surrounded by suburbs. A truly awful combination. Oh, and many of the nation's roads are crumbling. Any other remarks? Why are you opposed to this? Most Americans don't like public transport anyway, why do you care? Just admit it sucks and move on.
2
@ten_tego_teges A good chunk? Do you know of any theocratic European countries? No? Then I'd say all European countries are secular. We don't have mandatory Bible studies in school, we learn every subject no matter how controversial it is, and are free to blaspheme our little hearts out. Doesn't sound very religious to me. It sounds very unconcerned with religion- secular. If you mean practicing population, then sure. Eastern European countries tend to be more religious. But most of Western Europe doesn't look to a God for comfort- because they've improved their situations on their own.
2
@awrybowtie5591 If you don't mind me asking, where? I don't see any places that have been successfully converted from parking-focused to pedestrian-focused. Either way, it'll take decades to undo all of the damage
2
AtarashiiSekai22 If you're looking to reverse the trend, I would become a politician instead. You'll make no headway unless you migrate to an already (sorry) bloated East Coast city. Houston was a nice option but it got flooded, so if you're comfortable with answering the question of "how many people can I squeeze into a studio apartment?" then urban planning is for you. To make any real change and reintroduce mixed-use zoning laws into U.S. policy, the existing codes need to be updated. Problem is, (generally) conservative politicians have a huge stake in promoting the idea of self-sufficiency in the form of a two-story for the wife and kids. You'd have to fight off their "you're going to put factories next to schools again!" arguments. It won't be pretty. But if it gets done, then America will take a huge leap into sanity again.
1
@myquandros4129 One thing I realized will need to be addressed, is emergencies. How will robberies, fires and life-threatening situations be dealt with, in the absence of police cars, fire trucks and ambulances?
1
@Bob Landers Honestly? Taxes in Texas aren't that much lower than in most other states. Yeah, there's no income tax, but that doesn't apply to companies, it applies to individuals. So that wouldn't really be a pull factor for the companies in question. There are, in fact, franchise (business) taxes, gas taxes, 'sin' taxes, and its sales and excise taxes are well above the US average (to make up for the fact that they don't have any income tax). Personally I think it's a (slightly) more business-friendly environment, lax regulations, and a great bit of marketing on the part of Texas. But to actually live outside of Dallas, Houston, or Austin? Good luck commuting through the dry heat.
1
@TysonIke No, they really do. California's light rail project https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2020/02/12/california-high-speed-rail-cost-rises-80-billion/ is going WAY over budget, mainly due to American culture and its emphasis on property rights- it takes ages and exponentially increases costs, when everyone wants to make a little off their residence being valuable real estate for a public works project. That, and corruption and political infighting.
1
California's very liberally single-minded (at least politically), it can fund such a project. Most of America's GDP comes from California anyway, and they invest more into the Federal Government than is given back to them.
1
So the hope is that we can have our cake and eat it, too? I hope you're privy to the fact that, at least in urban centers, there's a finite amount of space. We can only develop so much before the foreign investors need to be restricted, or removed. If they want to tax evade (which no one should be doing anyway), they should just set up a few shell companies and funnel their income through Bermuda or, for the less risky, Ireland.
1
"too expensive, it would affect our bottom line!"
1
SF needs to just take the bad press and move forward with the housing projects. If done right, they could avoid legal trouble (use eminent domain, or offer NIMBY residents better housing in the new mixed-use area), and save the neighborhoods currently being gentrified by offering tech workers completely new ones.
1