This idea that the problem with western society is that we allow people to live in detached houses with yards instead of inner-city apartment buildings is bollocks. People need privacy, something to work on, freedom to move about, and agency over their environment to thrive psychologically. That's why prison is the opposite of this. "Something to work on" is partially being met by video games, and it's not going well for us. The rest are much harder to fake out. It's possible to have those things in the city, but only if you are extremely wealthy. For everybody else, it's a life of being tolerated by the people who own and control your world, so long as you keep paying out most of what you earn, don't make any noise or waves, and aren't interested in doing anything that doesn't already have the required space or vendor already within your designated, walkable, or public transport-safe area.
This would be a compelling complaint if the rest of the world didn't exist.
Every complaint about apartments stems from American inner city dilapidation. My first culture shock when arriving in the US was the sorry state of American apartments.
We know how to build apartments that are insulated to sound. Common building courtyards give kids safe play-areas within walking distance while supervised. Balconies can be built large and large common areas give people all the space they need.
Back in India, urban army cantonments used to be one of the best places to live. Funnily enough, they were simply gated colonies with large apartment complexes, and the recovered space was used for community activities and sports. That's all we're talking about.
Take the same surface area. You can choose to build in 2d (SFH) or in 3d (buildings). No where does this imply stuffing people like sardines. All they're saying is that if you optimize for your priorities in 3d it is unlikely that the 2d edge case will be most effective outcome.
I agree with this. The vast majority of the world is not "choosing" to live in small apartments, outside of a small minority of young urban professionals under the age of 35. There is simply not enough wealth, land, or resources to support detached housing in most of the world. No one wants to live in a tenement with their 12 closest relatives. It's not romantic, or some kind of culturally enlightened way of living. It sucks, and 99% of the world doesn't get the option to live in a house.
There was a study investigating people's preferences for living type ... I don't remember whether it was 40/60 or 60/40, but the preference for SFH or for apartments is not universal.
Honestly it's weird that people decide they know how other people want to live, both ways. Obv it stems from folks assuming that their values and wants are universal therefore anything derived from those is obvious, but some folks have some pretty extreme confidence in knowing other people's preferences.
> This idea that the problem with western society is that we allow people to live in detached houses with yards instead of inner-city apartment buildings is bollocks.
The problem isn't that people are allowed to live in detached houses with yards, it's that they're not allowed to live anywhere else. Plenty of people evidently want to live in apartment buildings - it wouldn't be necessary to make them illegal otherwise.
Do people need privacy (of the sort you mean) and something to work on (meaning a house and not a body, a language, a family, friendships)? Is that why everyone in New York and São Paulo and Tokyo is so sad?
I didn't mean you need the house to work on it, FWIW, but there are a lot of hobbies that will scratch that itch, and are impossible or make you a real dick if you live in an apartment complex. Sorry for not making that clear.
I want people to have the freedom to build what they want on their own land. I want people to have the freedom to live where they want and how they want.
