this post was submitted on 23 Dec 2023
1086 points (96.1% liked)
Microblog Memes
5881 readers
5752 users here now
A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.
Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.
Rules:
- Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
- Be nice.
- No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
- Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.
Related communities:
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
You might want to go through my comments again, lol. You seem very upset about me somewhat disagreeing with you.
This comment really is funny when you look at it. First you're pretty patronizing that they have access to the bike lanes too! I know in Seattle, you'd be crazy to use the bike lanes if you were handicapped. And 15 minute cites usually have "walkable" in the tagline.
Great, now compare that to a mini or studio apartment in Seattle. Better yet, compare that to an apartment on the South side of Chicago. As like anything else, if you're wealthy (not poor or middle class), everything is awesome.
I don't know why you're arguing with me, your black and white stance is confusing and tone deaf.
My family is quite the opposite of wealthy. It has nothing to do with class. The fact that the US did cities wrong doesn't mean that somehow 15 min cities don't work. I read the whole thread and you seem to be either really confused or rather short of reading comprehension. You seem to have the impression that a bike lane is an asphalt gutter next to the cars where only athletic young men in full sport gear ride bicycles. But in Europe bike lanes are segregated wide, well conditioned spaces, where kids, people with mobility limitations, adults and elderly all share a slow speed lane safe and protected from cars.
I'm not saying they don't? Wow, there must be a language barrier or something. I'm saying yes they can and do work, but some people want something else.
Yeah, and the people who want something else use the same arguments and rhetoric questions you have used all over this thread that are all fallacies meant to shutdown promotion of the concept because they feel personally threatened by the idea of stopping oil dependence.
LMAO, no. I'm not trying to shut down anyone. I'm trying to say that you guys are naive to think that everyone wants to live in a walkable city. I think a good portion of young people do, which is great and they should be accommodated. You also need transit to support those walkable cities or do you think getting there if you don't live there, magically happens without cars. Please don't tell me you're an urban planner.
You are not trying to shut anything down, but spreading the arguments that are meaningless you don't exactly help the idea of walkable cities and distract from your own main point that different people need different things.
But if we return to your main point as you state it, it begs a question of how many people really want that different thing. I would say that this requires a research rather than a debate, but my guess is that the ones that want a house in the forest in the middle of nowhere are going to be a statistic outliers. The rest are going to likely be distributed normally between very dense and very sparse but most will likely fit into 15-minute city dense
That's right, because nimby is a word for people who want 15 minute cities. /s