That's not how that works. Suburbs can't be a ponzi scheme. Get the fuck out of here with that click bait bullshit.
this post was submitted on 24 Jan 2024
-20 points (22.2% liked)
politics
19120 readers
4243 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Suburbs can't be a ponzi scheme
Genuine question: Why not?
While the article indeed barely touched on its headline, the way I've seen the "suburb infrastructure upkeep problem" described seems indeed reminiscent of a ponzi scheme.
The way I understand it:
Suburbs have a relatively low initial cost (for the city) compared to the taxes they generate. However, their maintenance cost is relatively high because Suburbs are huge.
Thus, US cities have long had a policy of paying the rising cost of their older Suburbs by creating new Suburbs - which is pretty analogous to a Ponzi scheme.
I think you misunderstand what a ponzi scheme actually is. It's a type of "investment" that's actually a scam where new investments are used to pay out older investors until the funds run out. It is named after the guy is famous for being the first to run one, Charles Ponzi.
In large chunks of this country the suburbs are comprised of hoas that bear a good chunk of the maintenance cost. And I would like to see actual proof that a suburb road needs more maintenance with passenger vehicles than a downtown road with large 3+ axle vehicles on it all of the time. If those roads do need more maintenance then that is likely a quality control problem that happens when you hire the lowest bidder for a job.
Don't feel bad. You are one of the hundreds if not thousands that I have interacted with that don't actually understand what a ponzi is and isn't. Not everything that doesn't work out or work out for everyone is a scam or a ponzi.
Oh and I did just skim the "article" and nothing it says leads me to the conclusion that ponzi is the right word here.
I'm not sure at the moment what the right term would be for what they are trying to describe but it's most definitely not ponzi.
It's just another shell game, robbing Peter to pay Paul. That traditional, red blooded, all American apple pie, run of the mill basic corruption we're all so accustomed too by now
No it's not, not at all, not if I understood what I skimmed well enough to infer what the whole thing is about. It's about suburban live being pushed as this ideal way to live and then generations later it turns out that suburban design for living is way less efficient than people living in apt complexes or in high rises in downtown and surrounding. No one schemed this up decades ago as a way to skim, steal and embezzle. Imo this is one of those things that seemed great at the time but no one took the time to forecast how it affects everything going forward.
You have the gist of it. It was heavily promoted, yes, but the cost of bringing city amenities out, so piping water and sewage instead of making everyone dig a well and have a septic, well those costs were almost universally kicked down the line, essentially paid for on bonds and bonds are now coming due, right when we they all need major refurbishing, so double whammy on the current generation.
It also started a fairly craven class warfare tactic. The chosen few who could afford too bought the new development, lived there for 7 years, and then sold it, took the $150,000 or whatever equity they didn't do anything to earn, and bought another brand new development. The 2nd owner tho, just bought into a house when the 30yr roof needs an "unexpected" $8000 repair, the basements started flooding because the garage settled wrong and busted pipes...you get the picture. Unless you're the chosen few, you're stuck carrying the bag and doing all the lifting. No matter what you do. Any complaining tho, and watch yo ass busted down to desolation. Murica.
None of that makes it a ponzi though. That's my whole point here.
A ponzi scheme is getting new people to pay out the old. See also, social security, health insurance, any and every MLM. See also, fractional banking.
It's unsanctioned fractional banking and the big boys don't like being called out for the crooks they are.
The same idea, playing out over time, can describe the credit industry. Really, why split hairs, we've been told for thousands of years that the money lenders are worse than murderers. Using current resources to pay off yesteryears resource use. That inversion describes all the above.
Perhaps poison pill is the more succinct packaging. Words are important, and clarity should always be attempted, surely, but semantics aside, everything I've written here are all different shades of the same thing, the evil of dehumanization caused by greed, predation and exploitation. A pox on society.
You just don't know when to stop. This suburban hellscape that some people seem to love is not and I repeat, not a ponzi, at all.
Mlms aren't exactly ponzis either. Words do in fact matter so get it right.
Poison pill isn't right either.
Please stop. You're going off topic and apparently have very very strong feelings about this and I think it's affecting how you see this particular article and discussion.
Man if you can't see the parallels then idk what to tell you. Everyone else can. I even ended the post with "semantics aside" to get at the underlying and try and move it past the inefficiencies of language but you persist. So in that, I concede you are right, there clearly is no reason to continue.
You're the one persisting.
I have and can run actual scams and ponzis and this is not that. Words matter and you sound like someone surprised that no one understands them when they are using literally to mean figuratively among others.
Suburban life is not for me but it's not a scam, it's a lot of wasted time for commutes and shopping trips, etc but it's not a ponzi, not an mlm, etc. No one single entity is getting rich off of suburbs that were built decades ago. I'm not sure you understand how all of this actually works.
Seriously my guy/gal. Go get some life experiences on how this shit works and then go bitch at someone else because I'm fine here. You can sit a book down in front of someone but if they refuse to learn how to read, what can you do.
Bro, look into how many of these municipalities are still paying for their development, generations later, long after everyone moved out. Or read the article. Define scam however you want, Idg2fs. You can argue that the Sacklers didn't scam everyone and leave us holding the bag, because we used the word SCAM instead of LIED like there's a great moral chasm between the two. Holy shit, I'm giving up on trying to get this across to you.
It's like you're just smart enough to start to get it, but then I stead of diving deep you just reinforce and double down, which makes you just smart enough to be a danger to yourself. Have fun with that. Don't comment back. I won't read it.
The article is fine. Blame the sub-editor for picking up one of the two metaphors in this quote:
Marohn suggests that what’s happened in places such as Ferguson and Penn Hills is the equivalent of a Ponzi scheme. It’s “the development version of slash-and-burn agriculture,” he tells the author. “We build a place, we use up the resources, and when the returns start diminishing, we move on, leaving a geographic time bomb in our wake!”
Again. Not a ponzi and definitely not slash and burn agriculture either. These neighborhoods exist and continue to have value for people. This "article" is hyperbolic bullshit and you lot have no idea what a ponzi actually is.
Also that quote talks about specific neighborhoods, not surbubia as a whole. Neighborhoods have their place. I would suggest that people move further out of the city center like we have and buy for a lot cheaper with a lower cost of living. If you work from home, there is no reason to be in a massive neighborhood that will have the same drive time to shops, schools, etc than living in what I call country'ish.
Race bait
It’s a class issue, not racial.
Yep. White families didn't suck it dry. The suburbs were largely always unsustainable and came at the cost of disadvantaged groups.
Fuck off.