• @dustyData@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    711 months ago

    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.

    • @pelespirit@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -611 months ago

      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.

      • lad
        link
        fedilink
        English
        211 months ago

        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

        • @pelespirit@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -211 months ago

          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