• corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    9 months ago

    75% of the water pumped out of America’s rock needs treatment for particulate. You’re going to need food municipal water for a while if you’re in America, and that is gonna limit your range from city hall.

    Also. Low-density is the worst configuration for housing on a cost/benefits and land-use perspective. We left the 1950s a long time ago, so, no matter where you live we can’t go back to sprawl and low density.

    Bad for your water (and other infrastructure) and bad for the planet. Otherwise, enjoy!

    • explore_broaden
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      If low density is the worst for housing cost-effectiveness, why is living in large cities so much more expensive?

      • fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        Subsidies. Both in form of roads and home ownership incentives being focused on single family homes. The fact that renting is the primary way to live in the city seems detrimental to it being cost effective too.

        • explore_broaden
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          9 months ago

          I find your point about renting compelling, is there anything that could be done to improve the situation?

          • fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            9 months ago

            Housing cooperatives seem good. There have been some successful uses of community land trusts to keep prices in check too.

            Better laws surrounding collective loans feels necessary for medium density too high density housing to be bought up by groups tenets. This just an issue at large for community and worker owned coops in my experience. There are some creative crowd funding type bonds out there but its not very responsive and better suited for long term plannings then seizing on need or opportunity.

            Lastly there are tenet unions to at least mitigate the rise of rent and unmet obligations by land lords.

      • OldWoodFrame@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        The thing I’ve heard is, think of how when you’re a mile away from each neighbor, it’s your tax dollars paying for the road, sewer, sidewalks, water, electric, gas lines, for a half mile in each direction. Initially and for maintenance and replacements. That’s why a lot of rural areas just don’t have sidewalks or fiber internet or sometimes they’re using well water.

        In a city duplex, you’re paying half the utilities for like 20 feet in front of your house.

        It just is more efficient to live closer together, the reason cost of living goes up is because everyone wants to live in the city and employers want that supply of workers so they try to get in or close to the city too and it’s a virtuous cycle of concentration. But housing supply being what it is, and all the jobs being nearby, means housing prices go up. Still worth it to most people hence why there’s still demand, but higher than living in a place with fewer jobs and amenities.