The War Against Neo-Urbanism and the "15 min. City".

[GMCGeneral]

Continuing this discussion series on urban vs. suburban living, let me state emphatically that I oppose the idea of neo urbanism, "walkable 15 minute cities" and other bullshit by its advocates for the simple fact that besides being an ideal control tool for the WEF, they are the antithesis for what America stands for.
Yes, there was redlining. Yes, there was "white flight", but who can blame anyone for wanting to hightail it out of dystopian urban blight to live in communities where home ownership and larger yards are king? These same "Neo Urbanists" also hate cars, and Suburbs and would do anything to FORCE people into "15 minute" cities.
I have two alternate realities of what might have happened during the mid 20th Century:
1. There was no redlining but suburban communities did emerge anyways, but would be more racially mixed, as they should have been.
2. Black communities could've overcome redlining by forming their own banks and insurance underwriters in order to facilitate home ownership/revitalization within the urban communities.
Thoughts?

 

[Concerned American]

1. There was no redlining but suburban communities did emerge anyways, but would be more racially mixed, as they should have been.

Very true. Many municipal zoning laws and regulations around new development had a tremendous impact on the diversity of neighborhoods during the late 20th century and they worked quite well.

Black communities could've overcome redlining by forming their own banks and insurance underwriters in order to facilitate home ownership/revitalization within the urban communities.

In the early to mid 20th century, their were attempts to do exactly what you are suggesting but racism and violence---in some cases stymied the efforts.
I am in opposition to what you call 15 minute cities as well. However, I believe that there is a market for them and we should allow the markets to work. That, in no way is a suggestion that these walkable neighborhoods should be the only option available. Diverse living arrangements should be available to all. Everyone doesn't want to live 50 miles from town nor does everyone want to live in the inner city. Different strokes---

 

[GMCGeneral]

Very true. Many municipal zoning laws and regulations around new development had a tremendous impact on the diversity of neighborhoods during the late 20th century and they worked quite well.

In the early to mid 20th century, their were attempts to do exactly what you are suggesting but racism and violence---in some cases stymied the efforts.
I am in opposition to what you call 15 minute cities as well. However, I believe that there is a market for them and we should allow the markets to work. That, in no way is a suggestion that these walkable neighborhoods should be the only option available. Diverse living arrangements should be available to all. Everyone doesn't want to live 50 miles from town nor does everyone want to live in the inner city. Different strokes---

I agree. Let the open markets decide and those of us who choose NOT to live in cities shouldn't be forced to do so. Unfortunately, there's a concerted effort to do just that, between the 15 minute cities, urban highway removal, etc.

 

[theHawk]

Lefties are so obsessed with controlling people. All commies must be opposed and not allowed any leadership position.

 

[GMCGeneral]

Lefties are so obsessed with controlling people. All commies must be opposed and not allowed any leadership position.

Tell me about it. ManDUMMY is a prime example of it. G-d help us if NYC elects this idiot.

 

[1srelluc]

If you don't live near a city why should you be concerned about a 15min city?

If cities want that on their own dime then what's the problem?

That said, nary a penny of fed dollars should go towards them.