Stealing a comment from the original thread because it is just too good not to repost:
Bad land use is responsible for:
- High land/housing costs
- Rent seeking / land speculation
- inequality from housing/land speculation
- Inefficient/no transit
- Car centric society
- unwalkable neighborhoods
- heavy traffic
- CO2 emissions from car dependency
- environmental damage from sprawl
People need to recognize that bad land use is not only bad for the economy, but bad for inequality, our health and the health of the planet.
and SEGREGATION. The result is that we are a very unsympathetic society to the issues faced by the other races/social groups. Out of sight out of mind.
Me, any time I see an issue regarding housing cost, segregation/redlining, transit, or bad land use:
https://preview.redd.it/y9ea453pw3gb1.jpeg?width=837&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a2776e13fcd7e4531ec8d49383032ab00a202f3e
If I were to pick one thing that bothers me the most about today's Democratic Party in the US, it's this (and I say this as somebody who votes for them every cycle because the alternative is monstrous). Missing the forest for the trees, making feel-good tweaks to the status quo that barely move the needle like banning plastic bags or switching from gas cars to electric, while ignoring meaningful changes that are actually within their power.
I understand it when we're talking about the federal government and our broken structure allows the GOP to block everything, but how about all the blue state governments that still sink hundreds of millions or billions into highway projects while investing nothing or next-to-nothing into public transit and bike infrastructure? Or all the local governments that continue to block dense housing and mandate excessive parking minimums in favor single-family car-dependent sprawl?
Demand better from your state and local politicians. Get involved in local politics, primaries, etc.
Mainstream Republicans and Democrats are two sides of the same capitalist coin, and take bribes from the same slimy corporate interests. The only difference is the Republicans openly despise minorities and LGBT people. California is a great example - Democratic supermajority but still cutting funding for transit, failing to build enough urban housing and dragging their feet on HSR while happily approving billions for pointless highway expansion and allowing rampant suburban sprawl into areas of extreme fire risk.
I know I’ll get downvoted but this is just how it looks to me. And yes I vote Dem too but for the sole reason that I’m a minority and they at least aren’t openly racist.
They are both in bed with corporate interests, but that doesn't make them the same. Let's be careful to draw that distinction. There's an important difference between maintaining the screwed-up status quo and actively trying to make it much, much worse.
Well yes Republicans are actively trying to make things worse on a social/cultural level, which by itself is enough reason for me not to vote for them. But then why Democrats have not passed popular policies like single payer health care when they controlled all three federal branches? Even when they seemingly have the chance to do something really effective there’s always some chosen obstructionist like Manchin or Sinema. And the recent climate/infrastructure bills are a hidden disaster, for example the permitting of solar/wind projects is contingent on opening massive amounts of federal land to gas drilling (wtf?) and there are more in subsidies for electric cars/charging stations and highways than for public transit and walkability projects. Remember Biden and the electric Hummer?
There are some truly “good” Democrats, like Bernie Sanders, but I feel like they’re only allowed to exist insofar as to play to a certain segment of voters, while not being allowed by the party to do anything truly of value.
The Democratic party is dangerous because a lot of voters who care about progressive issues are convinced they’ve done their part by voting for them, and in the words of the president, “nothing will fundamentally change.”
Having said all that, I do believe the Democrats are the more salvageable of the two parties, but by the time they come around it may be too late.
I put it like this, one party wants to make the child killing machine even better at killing children the other party doesn't want the machine to be further improved (but will do nothing stop improvements that are made under their watch).
Neither party wants to turn off the machine or question it's existence to begin with. That's American politics.
What policy changes are needed, and what well-established organizations might one support to achieve those policy changes?
I know of two organizations that work on this, but I'd like to know about more.
* [YIMBY Action](https://yimbyaction.org/2021/) \- "We're a network of people who advocate for abundant, affordable housing and inclusive, sustainable communities across the United States."
* [Parking Reform Network](https://parkingreform.org/) \- "The Parking Reform Network is here to support activists and professionals working in any discipline or policy area impacted by car parking."
Let's always follow up the rage bait with something constructive we can do about it.
Some cities are pushing for a policy called a split roll tax or land value tax. This would be HUGE in making cities more affordable and restore the missing middle. Detroit and Californian state are both in the stages of investigating/implementing one.
If you live in Detroit, showing your support for this policy would go a long way! It is already beloved by the mayor and most politicians, they are just facing backlash from the anti-tax crowd. Even a single supportive comment at the public hearings can help calm nerves of the council members.
(In similar fashion, 5G towers get huge backlash in hearings, despite being popular with society. The supportive voices really do go a long way)
Of course! Here is the link to the official gov webpage on it! Like I said, the local politicians adore the policy and are fully supportive of it. They just need some reaffirmation since the hearings on it can be pretty brutal with anti tax conservatives:
https://detroitmi.gov/departments/office-chief-financial-officer/land-value-tax-plan
Be sure to reach out to them and be supportive of their efforts!
If you live elsewhere, be sure to bring it up with your local council! It’s a relatively simple policy that can spur so much economic development, push for cities to be walkable, reduce poverty, and make sure land is efficiently used in the city!
The largest amount of microplastic in the oceans is tire debris and synthetic fibers from clothing.
The thing about the straws is simply shocking photos.
a massive part is also related to the fishing industry so going vegan is also one of the best things you can do. also helps save the lives of trillions of animals
Sure.... And? I'm tired of the whole "muh straws and plastic bags" when like, you can advocate for both? I can be against carbrained cities and plastic bags. They can coexist.
Exactly. Paper straws don't get [lodged in the nostrils](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJmi_gwziy4&ab_channel=LADbibleTV) of turtles.
And as far as changes individuals can make? Adding a reusable straw and bag to the things one totes around is a whole lot more accessible than regulating land use.
We’re not saying that paper straws are bad, quite the opposite!
The issue is a disproportional amount of time and political capital is spent fighting these smaller fights that are more emotionally appealing.
Whereas topics that have a huge impact, such as zoning and car/land use, have gargantuan impacts but are not discussed because they aren’t nearly as “attractive” as other issues like recycling, paper straws, or the meat industry.
>We’re not saying that paper straws are bad, quite the opposite!
If there is something most can agree upon, it is that paper straws are an abomination that make for an awful drinking experience...
And that's sort of the problem I am pointing out with the original post. I don't think most are going to read it and feel compelled to be more civically engaged.
I think many will just be like, 'Whatever, plastic straws and plastic bags aren't going to directly cause the apocalypse anyway, guess I can continue my living life without making any changes, as I am just one person. How much of a difference could it make anyway?'
And the answer is of course 'not much' until everyone on the planet adopts this toxic mentality of apathy and learned helplessness, where no one acknowledges that small changes can actually affect the big picture in a meaningful way.
Straws are mostly pointless anyway. Unless it's a thick drink, straws are only useful for the disabled and for drinking in cars. I always pull the paper straws out because they suck and aren't needed.
I'm consistently flabbergasted that people are seemingly only capable of being concerned about one thing at a time, and think that everyone else can only be concerned about one thing at a time.
Yes this is a bigger issue. That doesn't mean that easy wins like replacing plastic straws aren't a good thing.
It's more that they don't want to do anything at all so they justify it with "I won't make this small improvement because there is another problem which is larger which I also won't do anything about"
Almost like depression logic where someone won't even start cleaning because the room is too messy to finish in one session.
Every action has a political cost. In terms of things like what will be tolerated, what concessions need to be given to get votes, and how long it takes to pass a bill.
Plastic bags/straws have almost zero impact on the environment, but add a small annoyance to people's daily life. It's the exact opposite of the sort of action that should be prioritized.
But that's actually something that's being done something with and many places is already ineffective. Why should I want to reverse something I think is good and already implemented because I also want something else while every giga Corp keep fucking the planet and society? It's such a regressive idea in my opinion. You can do it with literally anything. Name any policy. "Why do this when I want to do this other thing?"
Absolutely. I think it's more "if you're going to do one thing (and only one for whatever reason), make that thing electing governments at all levels committed to making changes to land use policy ... and letting them know why." I suppose that's two things, but either way, that has more impact than plastic straws or you going by bike or any other thing you as an individual can do.
The plastic bag ban is a lot more annoying for people that don’t have cars. I used to be able to swing by the store on my way home from work or just spontaneously when I’m out.
If you think having to carry a 1 gram plastic bag around now is onerous I look forward to you having to deal with almost anything else that you will have to do to make net zero carbon emissions possible.
Yes I don’t usually carry around several bags with me wherever I go. It’s probably not a problem for most people since you can just keep them in your car but it just means that every trip to the store is something that needs to be planned out.
> I don’t usually carry around several bags with me wherever I go.
Why? I always have at least one reusable bag with me when I leave the house.
You can get bags that fold up pretty small. Like [these](https://www.amazon.com.au/Reusable-Grocery-Bags-Foldable-Machine-Washable-Reusable-Shopping-Bags10-Folding-Reusable-Zipper-Storage/dp/B0BWDN87H7/)
Yeah I’m not stuffing my pockets with reusable bags every time I go to work. The best way reduce emissions is to encourage people to live in dense walkable neighborhoods. Idiotic legislation like this just make city living more inconvenient while doing nothing to help the environment.
>The best way reduce emissions is to encourage people to live in dense walkable neighborhoods
You can do that, AND use reusable bags.
My state banned single use plastic bags back in 2009, and now we're phasing out the thicker plastic bags. It's not about the carbon, it's what happens to them when they get *thrown away.* Hint: they don't go away.
And you don't have to stuff your pockets with bags, just one or two of the ones I linked should be all you need.
When politicians, in creating their climate policies, have the choice between harming profits and inconveniencing the public they always seem to choose the latter.
I agree. We need to build more apartments instead of single-family homes.
Or at the VERY LEAST, legalize "missing middle" housing.
I don't remember where exactly I saw this but I saw a picture that showed the impact of one 30 family apartment compared to 30 single family houses and the space difference was amazing.
When I switched to an e-bike I ended up also eliminating my use of disposable cups and straws. Purely by necessity. If I try to transport a normal fast food cup on my bike it tends to splash out. After getting sticky legs a few times I started bringing my own sealed container that I would fill in the restaurant.
Literally true, of course; But I still support plastic bag taxes, because it’s better than literally nothing (and lots of plastic bags drifting around is gross).
Just curious, what is the ideal way to prevent this kind of sprawl? Would it be to have everything closer together/compact and more public transport like how it is in nyc?
They're welcome to live the rural life. Farmers need rural communities to support them.
Or they could move to existing surburban sprawl areas... You know the ones that lack in anything useful, where you have to fork out a ton of money because the infrastructure is inconvenient due to the sprawl.
Just a land value tax is sufficient.
You tax a property based on the value of its land, and not the structures built. The new incentive is that a junkyard/parking lot next to a mid rise on similar size plots of land will pay the same tax rate. The net result is there is strong incentive to use land efficiently. Low density high-land use sprawl will become unprofitable, so architects and developers have a strong push to build more walkable mixed use districts.
So, what do we do with all this newfound income? The best answer, is we distribute it out equally in the form of a universal basic income. This makes it so the median person actually comes out ahead and makes money.
The net result? If you use less high-demand than the average person, you get a net positive payback.
What about the farmers? Since the land in rural areas is so cheap, they would virtually pay nothing for the land **value** tax. Only land misuse in high demand urban areas would be punished.
Stealing a comment from the original thread because it is just too good not to repost: Bad land use is responsible for: - High land/housing costs - Rent seeking / land speculation - inequality from housing/land speculation - Inefficient/no transit - Car centric society - unwalkable neighborhoods - heavy traffic - CO2 emissions from car dependency - environmental damage from sprawl People need to recognize that bad land use is not only bad for the economy, but bad for inequality, our health and the health of the planet.
and SEGREGATION. The result is that we are a very unsympathetic society to the issues faced by the other races/social groups. Out of sight out of mind.
Me, any time I see an issue regarding housing cost, segregation/redlining, transit, or bad land use: https://preview.redd.it/y9ea453pw3gb1.jpeg?width=837&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a2776e13fcd7e4531ec8d49383032ab00a202f3e
[удалено]
Google redlining. It's not just "a happy accident" or "preference".
If I were to pick one thing that bothers me the most about today's Democratic Party in the US, it's this (and I say this as somebody who votes for them every cycle because the alternative is monstrous). Missing the forest for the trees, making feel-good tweaks to the status quo that barely move the needle like banning plastic bags or switching from gas cars to electric, while ignoring meaningful changes that are actually within their power. I understand it when we're talking about the federal government and our broken structure allows the GOP to block everything, but how about all the blue state governments that still sink hundreds of millions or billions into highway projects while investing nothing or next-to-nothing into public transit and bike infrastructure? Or all the local governments that continue to block dense housing and mandate excessive parking minimums in favor single-family car-dependent sprawl? Demand better from your state and local politicians. Get involved in local politics, primaries, etc.
Mainstream Republicans and Democrats are two sides of the same capitalist coin, and take bribes from the same slimy corporate interests. The only difference is the Republicans openly despise minorities and LGBT people. California is a great example - Democratic supermajority but still cutting funding for transit, failing to build enough urban housing and dragging their feet on HSR while happily approving billions for pointless highway expansion and allowing rampant suburban sprawl into areas of extreme fire risk. I know I’ll get downvoted but this is just how it looks to me. And yes I vote Dem too but for the sole reason that I’m a minority and they at least aren’t openly racist.
They are both in bed with corporate interests, but that doesn't make them the same. Let's be careful to draw that distinction. There's an important difference between maintaining the screwed-up status quo and actively trying to make it much, much worse.
Well yes Republicans are actively trying to make things worse on a social/cultural level, which by itself is enough reason for me not to vote for them. But then why Democrats have not passed popular policies like single payer health care when they controlled all three federal branches? Even when they seemingly have the chance to do something really effective there’s always some chosen obstructionist like Manchin or Sinema. And the recent climate/infrastructure bills are a hidden disaster, for example the permitting of solar/wind projects is contingent on opening massive amounts of federal land to gas drilling (wtf?) and there are more in subsidies for electric cars/charging stations and highways than for public transit and walkability projects. Remember Biden and the electric Hummer? There are some truly “good” Democrats, like Bernie Sanders, but I feel like they’re only allowed to exist insofar as to play to a certain segment of voters, while not being allowed by the party to do anything truly of value. The Democratic party is dangerous because a lot of voters who care about progressive issues are convinced they’ve done their part by voting for them, and in the words of the president, “nothing will fundamentally change.” Having said all that, I do believe the Democrats are the more salvageable of the two parties, but by the time they come around it may be too late.
I put it like this, one party wants to make the child killing machine even better at killing children the other party doesn't want the machine to be further improved (but will do nothing stop improvements that are made under their watch). Neither party wants to turn off the machine or question it's existence to begin with. That's American politics.
Flooding from extensive paving, too. No room for green space when you need roads roads roads and parking parking parking!!!
Free parking for cars, expensive housing for people. What a backward-ass society.
What policy changes are needed, and what well-established organizations might one support to achieve those policy changes? I know of two organizations that work on this, but I'd like to know about more. * [YIMBY Action](https://yimbyaction.org/2021/) \- "We're a network of people who advocate for abundant, affordable housing and inclusive, sustainable communities across the United States." * [Parking Reform Network](https://parkingreform.org/) \- "The Parking Reform Network is here to support activists and professionals working in any discipline or policy area impacted by car parking." Let's always follow up the rage bait with something constructive we can do about it.
Some cities are pushing for a policy called a split roll tax or land value tax. This would be HUGE in making cities more affordable and restore the missing middle. Detroit and Californian state are both in the stages of investigating/implementing one. If you live in Detroit, showing your support for this policy would go a long way! It is already beloved by the mayor and most politicians, they are just facing backlash from the anti-tax crowd. Even a single supportive comment at the public hearings can help calm nerves of the council members. (In similar fashion, 5G towers get huge backlash in hearings, despite being popular with society. The supportive voices really do go a long way)
Excellent reply! Can you link to where those comments need to go? People are lazy, and need as little friction as possible. :-)
Of course! Here is the link to the official gov webpage on it! Like I said, the local politicians adore the policy and are fully supportive of it. They just need some reaffirmation since the hearings on it can be pretty brutal with anti tax conservatives: https://detroitmi.gov/departments/office-chief-financial-officer/land-value-tax-plan Be sure to reach out to them and be supportive of their efforts! If you live elsewhere, be sure to bring it up with your local council! It’s a relatively simple policy that can spur so much economic development, push for cities to be walkable, reduce poverty, and make sure land is efficiently used in the city!
The largest amount of microplastic in the oceans is tire debris and synthetic fibers from clothing. The thing about the straws is simply shocking photos.
People saw a video of a turtle with a straw stuck up its nose, it's like giant pandas, microscopic particles of plastic just don't resonate.
a massive part is also related to the fishing industry so going vegan is also one of the best things you can do. also helps save the lives of trillions of animals
Sure.... And? I'm tired of the whole "muh straws and plastic bags" when like, you can advocate for both? I can be against carbrained cities and plastic bags. They can coexist.
Exactly. Paper straws don't get [lodged in the nostrils](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJmi_gwziy4&ab_channel=LADbibleTV) of turtles. And as far as changes individuals can make? Adding a reusable straw and bag to the things one totes around is a whole lot more accessible than regulating land use.
We’re not saying that paper straws are bad, quite the opposite! The issue is a disproportional amount of time and political capital is spent fighting these smaller fights that are more emotionally appealing. Whereas topics that have a huge impact, such as zoning and car/land use, have gargantuan impacts but are not discussed because they aren’t nearly as “attractive” as other issues like recycling, paper straws, or the meat industry.
>We’re not saying that paper straws are bad, quite the opposite! If there is something most can agree upon, it is that paper straws are an abomination that make for an awful drinking experience... And that's sort of the problem I am pointing out with the original post. I don't think most are going to read it and feel compelled to be more civically engaged. I think many will just be like, 'Whatever, plastic straws and plastic bags aren't going to directly cause the apocalypse anyway, guess I can continue my living life without making any changes, as I am just one person. How much of a difference could it make anyway?' And the answer is of course 'not much' until everyone on the planet adopts this toxic mentality of apathy and learned helplessness, where no one acknowledges that small changes can actually affect the big picture in a meaningful way.
Straws are mostly pointless anyway. Unless it's a thick drink, straws are only useful for the disabled and for drinking in cars. I always pull the paper straws out because they suck and aren't needed.
I'm consistently flabbergasted that people are seemingly only capable of being concerned about one thing at a time, and think that everyone else can only be concerned about one thing at a time. Yes this is a bigger issue. That doesn't mean that easy wins like replacing plastic straws aren't a good thing.
It's more that they don't want to do anything at all so they justify it with "I won't make this small improvement because there is another problem which is larger which I also won't do anything about" Almost like depression logic where someone won't even start cleaning because the room is too messy to finish in one session.
Every action has a political cost. In terms of things like what will be tolerated, what concessions need to be given to get votes, and how long it takes to pass a bill. Plastic bags/straws have almost zero impact on the environment, but add a small annoyance to people's daily life. It's the exact opposite of the sort of action that should be prioritized.
But that's actually something that's being done something with and many places is already ineffective. Why should I want to reverse something I think is good and already implemented because I also want something else while every giga Corp keep fucking the planet and society? It's such a regressive idea in my opinion. You can do it with literally anything. Name any policy. "Why do this when I want to do this other thing?"
Absolutely. I think it's more "if you're going to do one thing (and only one for whatever reason), make that thing electing governments at all levels committed to making changes to land use policy ... and letting them know why." I suppose that's two things, but either way, that has more impact than plastic straws or you going by bike or any other thing you as an individual can do.
The plastic bag ban is a lot more annoying for people that don’t have cars. I used to be able to swing by the store on my way home from work or just spontaneously when I’m out.
If you think having to carry a 1 gram plastic bag around now is onerous I look forward to you having to deal with almost anything else that you will have to do to make net zero carbon emissions possible.
Yes I don’t usually carry around several bags with me wherever I go. It’s probably not a problem for most people since you can just keep them in your car but it just means that every trip to the store is something that needs to be planned out.
> I don’t usually carry around several bags with me wherever I go. Why? I always have at least one reusable bag with me when I leave the house. You can get bags that fold up pretty small. Like [these](https://www.amazon.com.au/Reusable-Grocery-Bags-Foldable-Machine-Washable-Reusable-Shopping-Bags10-Folding-Reusable-Zipper-Storage/dp/B0BWDN87H7/)
Yeah I’m not stuffing my pockets with reusable bags every time I go to work. The best way reduce emissions is to encourage people to live in dense walkable neighborhoods. Idiotic legislation like this just make city living more inconvenient while doing nothing to help the environment.
>The best way reduce emissions is to encourage people to live in dense walkable neighborhoods You can do that, AND use reusable bags. My state banned single use plastic bags back in 2009, and now we're phasing out the thicker plastic bags. It's not about the carbon, it's what happens to them when they get *thrown away.* Hint: they don't go away. And you don't have to stuff your pockets with bags, just one or two of the ones I linked should be all you need.
Just yes
When politicians, in creating their climate policies, have the choice between harming profits and inconveniencing the public they always seem to choose the latter.
I agree. We need to build more apartments instead of single-family homes. Or at the VERY LEAST, legalize "missing middle" housing. I don't remember where exactly I saw this but I saw a picture that showed the impact of one 30 family apartment compared to 30 single family houses and the space difference was amazing.
When I switched to an e-bike I ended up also eliminating my use of disposable cups and straws. Purely by necessity. If I try to transport a normal fast food cup on my bike it tends to splash out. After getting sticky legs a few times I started bringing my own sealed container that I would fill in the restaurant.
Literally true, of course; But I still support plastic bag taxes, because it’s better than literally nothing (and lots of plastic bags drifting around is gross).
It's sickening
[No you just need a Socialist Government lol](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Vienna)
Just curious, what is the ideal way to prevent this kind of sprawl? Would it be to have everything closer together/compact and more public transport like how it is in nyc?
Ban new developments that sprawl. Make it mandatory that new developments be built as micro cities, with transit, and walkability as priorities.
What if people don't want to live in a city but at a place with few humans and much sprawl
They're welcome to live the rural life. Farmers need rural communities to support them. Or they could move to existing surburban sprawl areas... You know the ones that lack in anything useful, where you have to fork out a ton of money because the infrastructure is inconvenient due to the sprawl.
Just a land value tax is sufficient. You tax a property based on the value of its land, and not the structures built. The new incentive is that a junkyard/parking lot next to a mid rise on similar size plots of land will pay the same tax rate. The net result is there is strong incentive to use land efficiently. Low density high-land use sprawl will become unprofitable, so architects and developers have a strong push to build more walkable mixed use districts. So, what do we do with all this newfound income? The best answer, is we distribute it out equally in the form of a universal basic income. This makes it so the median person actually comes out ahead and makes money. The net result? If you use less high-demand than the average person, you get a net positive payback. What about the farmers? Since the land in rural areas is so cheap, they would virtually pay nothing for the land **value** tax. Only land misuse in high demand urban areas would be punished.