the whole point of "walkability" and things like that is to make cities places where people can climb the economic ladder again--and the whole problem with urbanism is that maybe just talking about these things isn't the best way to accomplish that
-
-
Replying to @380kmh
I think we've overcome proximity-based economic realities through technology. The culture is waiting to catch up. The internet is killing all business but experiential business. Office will be next. Once it goes, cities truly will be reduced to playgrounds and dens
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @digitalvor
No, proximity is still incredibly important--this is why so much of the country is stagnating, and why there is no rural equivalent of silicon valley or NYC. We are ignoring the importance of proximity to the ruin of most of the country's economy
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @380kmh
The suburbs are a testament to the fact you can scale up mobility effectively. I agree human scale mobility is preferable, but that's not married to cities and I think it will be less relevant in the future. I think we're experiencing a boom of twee bourgeois urbanism.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @digitalvor
suburbs *are* married to cities tho, you don't get a suburb popping up in the middle of nowhere with no urban economy to tap into aim of walkability in economic terms is less abt mobility and more about barriers to entry we are certainly experiencign boom of twee urbanism
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @380kmh
I live in a place where there are suburbs unto themselves built around natural resources and tourism. The end of the built form is not cities. The suburb as I understand it is a township - medium scale - and it's an economic engine scaled down. It needn't be huge.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @digitalvor
Bruh you live in a major metropolitan area--with the exception I suppose of retirement communities, those suburbs wouldn't be getting built if not for Miami/FL/WPB
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @380kmh
These suburbs exist because Flagler installed infrastructure (trains) which let people move here. South Florida is not an outgrowth of Miami. It grew up one town at a time. In my county Miami is not a job creator where I live
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @digitalvor
Tampa, Orlando, etc, all had much more infrastructure much earlier than Miami did--but Miami outclassed all of them and grew tremendously, the rest only really catching up in the sunbelt boom Miami might be far from your town specifically--but how many work in Fort Lauderdale?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @380kmh
I will put it this way, just because cities can be economic drivers, should they be? Has this really been healthy? Making people divest of environments where they can accrue real assets to make them work in one megalopolis? It's not necessary.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
It's more that *only* cities can be economic drivers, and they can do this either well or not well. America took a hard lurch to "not well" from the 50s onwards, for a lot of reasons. If I had to name one above all, it would be "protect mature industry from new industry"
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.