1. We don’t have to suffer. We also don’t have to hand over 100 billion $ to the govt because they want it. Many of us may not even be around in 50 years. It is essentially paying for the next generation and also agreeing to pushing them into debt.
Millennials will then be blamed not unlike baby boomers are blamed by millennials for ‘messing up the next generation future’. Where in fact, it’s agreeing to unrealistic long term plans like this and signing carte blanche whenever the state decides that we need to shell out without them being accountable.
2. I disagree that we will need to have service jobs. Or that people need to travel to be ‘around other people’ who want them around.
Having said that, we do need public transport. We don’t need to lump affordable housing with public transport costs. Just like part of the gas tax was set aside to train prisoners to make them employable. It’s necessary but what’s with the shifty shenanigans?
The public are lured into supporting housing and affordable housing imagining that it benefits them but that’s a marginal side effect. The real purpose of random and especially questionable rezoning to keep building is to create a stream of income through property taxes. Ditto with job creation. Jobs have an inflationary effect.
An unemployed person in the rural area can still have avocado toast if he has a garden. He doesn’t need $10.00 to buy an avocado toast. However he can’t participate in the same economy as a 6 figure earning Silicon Valley resident of CA. However do note that all of them will be paying the same tax for public transport. As will their children over 50 years.
3. Sure. I will vote as inspired by my line.
4. I disagree. I literally don’t know any affordable city that is high density. If you include Mumbai’s slums or Hong Kong’s coffin apartments or NYC rent controlled and subsidized projects, I reject them. It’s not affordable. The cost of expensive living morphs from currency to something else that can be quantified in currency terms. There is a cost to cramming people in resource restricted areas which is also a fixed land area.
5. It’s such a general statement to say ‘ we need people to cooperate for a greater good’. It’s a feel good statement that means nothing unless we get down to specifics.
The US is a better place to live in than most parts of the world. We don’t have tribal wars or bloody religious uprisings or bomb threats everyday. I disagree with you. I don’t know what cooperation you are talking about in ‘other parts of the world’.
Admittedly there are other parts of the world where people cooperate and set aside individualism, but I am willing to bet that they are low density population areas where people have enough space. Cooperation thrives when everyone has the opportunity to make things work for everyone without just one group shouldering the burden. It is another way to make sure everyone carries equal responsibility. Cooperation is NOT co dependency.
Millennials will then be blamed not unlike baby boomers are blamed by millennials for ‘messing up the next generation future’. Where in fact, it’s agreeing to unrealistic long term plans like this and signing carte blanche whenever the state decides that we need to shell out without them being accountable.
2. I disagree that we will need to have service jobs. Or that people need to travel to be ‘around other people’ who want them around.
Having said that, we do need public transport. We don’t need to lump affordable housing with public transport costs. Just like part of the gas tax was set aside to train prisoners to make them employable. It’s necessary but what’s with the shifty shenanigans?
The public are lured into supporting housing and affordable housing imagining that it benefits them but that’s a marginal side effect. The real purpose of random and especially questionable rezoning to keep building is to create a stream of income through property taxes. Ditto with job creation. Jobs have an inflationary effect.
An unemployed person in the rural area can still have avocado toast if he has a garden. He doesn’t need $10.00 to buy an avocado toast. However he can’t participate in the same economy as a 6 figure earning Silicon Valley resident of CA. However do note that all of them will be paying the same tax for public transport. As will their children over 50 years.
3. Sure. I will vote as inspired by my line.
4. I disagree. I literally don’t know any affordable city that is high density. If you include Mumbai’s slums or Hong Kong’s coffin apartments or NYC rent controlled and subsidized projects, I reject them. It’s not affordable. The cost of expensive living morphs from currency to something else that can be quantified in currency terms. There is a cost to cramming people in resource restricted areas which is also a fixed land area.
5. It’s such a general statement to say ‘ we need people to cooperate for a greater good’. It’s a feel good statement that means nothing unless we get down to specifics.
The US is a better place to live in than most parts of the world. We don’t have tribal wars or bloody religious uprisings or bomb threats everyday. I disagree with you. I don’t know what cooperation you are talking about in ‘other parts of the world’.
Admittedly there are other parts of the world where people cooperate and set aside individualism, but I am willing to bet that they are low density population areas where people have enough space. Cooperation thrives when everyone has the opportunity to make things work for everyone without just one group shouldering the burden. It is another way to make sure everyone carries equal responsibility. Cooperation is NOT co dependency.