Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
34f3f3f
Participant[quote=briansd1][quote=qwerty007]
Doesn’t de-urbanization contradict centralized planning and densification and public transport?
Eco-living will not work. It’s just a marketing fad. The best way to be eco-friendly is to consume less and to reproduce less.
Cut all consumption by 50%. Most Americans could easily reduce their clothing purchases by 50% and drive their cars twice as long and double the replacement cycle of their goods. That would collapse the economy but be great for the environment.
Our society is based on consumption so I don’t see eco-living happening. Green is a marketing slogan to make consumers feel less guilty about consuming.[/quote]
Read urbanisation soCal style viz; suburbanisation. So yes, a possible diction error. Eco-living will not work? That may depend on how you define eco-living, but perhaps you can offer some thoughts on why using alternative fuels, installing photo-voltaic cells, re-cycling, and consuming less “won’t work”? Fads are a by-product of the media-driven, consumer-oriented information age we live in. If fads are an effective means to get a Sword of Damocles message across then that might say more about us than the means. And if the message is one of doom vs consumption then I would have thought it makes people more guilty about consuming, not less.
Participant[quote=briansd1][quote=qwerty007]
Doesn’t de-urbanization contradict centralized planning and densification and public transport?
Eco-living will not work. It’s just a marketing fad. The best way to be eco-friendly is to consume less and to reproduce less.
Cut all consumption by 50%. Most Americans could easily reduce their clothing purchases by 50% and drive their cars twice as long and double the replacement cycle of their goods. That would collapse the economy but be great for the environment.
Our society is based on consumption so I don’t see eco-living happening. Green is a marketing slogan to make consumers feel less guilty about consuming.[/quote]
Read urbanisation soCal style viz; suburbanisation. So yes, a possible diction error. Eco-living will not work? That may depend on how you define eco-living, but perhaps you can offer some thoughts on why using alternative fuels, installing photo-voltaic cells, re-cycling, and consuming less “won’t work”? Fads are a by-product of the media-driven, consumer-oriented information age we live in. If fads are an effective means to get a Sword of Damocles message across then that might say more about us than the means. And if the message is one of doom vs consumption then I would have thought it makes people more guilty about consuming, not less.
Participant[quote=briansd1][quote=qwerty007]
Doesn’t de-urbanization contradict centralized planning and densification and public transport?
Eco-living will not work. It’s just a marketing fad. The best way to be eco-friendly is to consume less and to reproduce less.
Cut all consumption by 50%. Most Americans could easily reduce their clothing purchases by 50% and drive their cars twice as long and double the replacement cycle of their goods. That would collapse the economy but be great for the environment.
Our society is based on consumption so I don’t see eco-living happening. Green is a marketing slogan to make consumers feel less guilty about consuming.[/quote]
Read urbanisation soCal style viz; suburbanisation. So yes, a possible diction error. Eco-living will not work? That may depend on how you define eco-living, but perhaps you can offer some thoughts on why using alternative fuels, installing photo-voltaic cells, re-cycling, and consuming less “won’t work”? Fads are a by-product of the media-driven, consumer-oriented information age we live in. If fads are an effective means to get a Sword of Damocles message across then that might say more about us than the means. And if the message is one of doom vs consumption then I would have thought it makes people more guilty about consuming, not less.
Participant[quote=briansd1][quote=qwerty007]
Doesn’t de-urbanization contradict centralized planning and densification and public transport?
Eco-living will not work. It’s just a marketing fad. The best way to be eco-friendly is to consume less and to reproduce less.
Cut all consumption by 50%. Most Americans could easily reduce their clothing purchases by 50% and drive their cars twice as long and double the replacement cycle of their goods. That would collapse the economy but be great for the environment.
Our society is based on consumption so I don’t see eco-living happening. Green is a marketing slogan to make consumers feel less guilty about consuming.[/quote]
Read urbanisation soCal style viz; suburbanisation. So yes, a possible diction error. Eco-living will not work? That may depend on how you define eco-living, but perhaps you can offer some thoughts on why using alternative fuels, installing photo-voltaic cells, re-cycling, and consuming less “won’t work”? Fads are a by-product of the media-driven, consumer-oriented information age we live in. If fads are an effective means to get a Sword of Damocles message across then that might say more about us than the means. And if the message is one of doom vs consumption then I would have thought it makes people more guilty about consuming, not less.
Participant[quote=briansd1][quote=4plexowner]
People who do own Downtown get tired of paying $500+++ in HOA every month. The restaurants are expensive; and after ownership expenses, people don’t really enjoy Downtown much anymore.[/quote]
Obviously not many have lived in a big city here. These things you call condos, are apartments elsewhere and is the norm in big cities. Poor parking, restricted space, and smelly streets is big city living folks unless you’re uber rich. The one thing I agree with is that HOA fees are a real turn off. This goes right against the grain because they are too high and therefore unsustainable. Cut the services offered to just basic amenities. Get rid of the gyms, pools, manicured forecourts, security guard etc. With land prices being what they are, I see building upwards being the trend for the future. De-urbanisation, community building, centralised town planning, public transportation, affordable housing, eco-living, oh yeah, and de-parochialisation crash course.
Participant[quote=briansd1][quote=4plexowner]
People who do own Downtown get tired of paying $500+++ in HOA every month. The restaurants are expensive; and after ownership expenses, people don’t really enjoy Downtown much anymore.[/quote]
Obviously not many have lived in a big city here. These things you call condos, are apartments elsewhere and is the norm in big cities. Poor parking, restricted space, and smelly streets is big city living folks unless you’re uber rich. The one thing I agree with is that HOA fees are a real turn off. This goes right against the grain because they are too high and therefore unsustainable. Cut the services offered to just basic amenities. Get rid of the gyms, pools, manicured forecourts, security guard etc. With land prices being what they are, I see building upwards being the trend for the future. De-urbanisation, community building, centralised town planning, public transportation, affordable housing, eco-living, oh yeah, and de-parochialisation crash course.
Participant[quote=briansd1][quote=4plexowner]
People who do own Downtown get tired of paying $500+++ in HOA every month. The restaurants are expensive; and after ownership expenses, people don’t really enjoy Downtown much anymore.[/quote]
Obviously not many have lived in a big city here. These things you call condos, are apartments elsewhere and is the norm in big cities. Poor parking, restricted space, and smelly streets is big city living folks unless you’re uber rich. The one thing I agree with is that HOA fees are a real turn off. This goes right against the grain because they are too high and therefore unsustainable. Cut the services offered to just basic amenities. Get rid of the gyms, pools, manicured forecourts, security guard etc. With land prices being what they are, I see building upwards being the trend for the future. De-urbanisation, community building, centralised town planning, public transportation, affordable housing, eco-living, oh yeah, and de-parochialisation crash course.
Participant[quote=briansd1][quote=4plexowner]
People who do own Downtown get tired of paying $500+++ in HOA every month. The restaurants are expensive; and after ownership expenses, people don’t really enjoy Downtown much anymore.[/quote]
Obviously not many have lived in a big city here. These things you call condos, are apartments elsewhere and is the norm in big cities. Poor parking, restricted space, and smelly streets is big city living folks unless you’re uber rich. The one thing I agree with is that HOA fees are a real turn off. This goes right against the grain because they are too high and therefore unsustainable. Cut the services offered to just basic amenities. Get rid of the gyms, pools, manicured forecourts, security guard etc. With land prices being what they are, I see building upwards being the trend for the future. De-urbanisation, community building, centralised town planning, public transportation, affordable housing, eco-living, oh yeah, and de-parochialisation crash course.
Participant[quote=briansd1][quote=4plexowner]
People who do own Downtown get tired of paying $500+++ in HOA every month. The restaurants are expensive; and after ownership expenses, people don’t really enjoy Downtown much anymore.[/quote]
Obviously not many have lived in a big city here. These things you call condos, are apartments elsewhere and is the norm in big cities. Poor parking, restricted space, and smelly streets is big city living folks unless you’re uber rich. The one thing I agree with is that HOA fees are a real turn off. This goes right against the grain because they are too high and therefore unsustainable. Cut the services offered to just basic amenities. Get rid of the gyms, pools, manicured forecourts, security guard etc. With land prices being what they are, I see building upwards being the trend for the future. De-urbanisation, community building, centralised town planning, public transportation, affordable housing, eco-living, oh yeah, and de-parochialisation crash course.
Participant[quote=temeculaguy] …but if the difference between 78 and 78.5 years of age is going to set the rest of you back a few hundred grand, just give me some morphine…
I would prefer to avoid copying the UK’s dental plan if at all possible, yikes!![/quote]
I think this is correct. The US system is often research driven, and not trying to play catch up with European longevity, but ironically, state run systems can add 0.5 years and may actually save a few hundred grand. But, I grew up in the UK and people grumbled continuously about the health care system, and it was always a major electoral issue. Dentistry used to be free as well, but that changed sometime ago. It is now private, expensive, and pushes the cosmetic smile business. Did you know that many years ago, people used urine to bleach their teeth. That might explain why you don’t see the word “snogging” appear very often in earlier literature.
Participant[quote=temeculaguy] …but if the difference between 78 and 78.5 years of age is going to set the rest of you back a few hundred grand, just give me some morphine…
I would prefer to avoid copying the UK’s dental plan if at all possible, yikes!![/quote]
I think this is correct. The US system is often research driven, and not trying to play catch up with European longevity, but ironically, state run systems can add 0.5 years and may actually save a few hundred grand. But, I grew up in the UK and people grumbled continuously about the health care system, and it was always a major electoral issue. Dentistry used to be free as well, but that changed sometime ago. It is now private, expensive, and pushes the cosmetic smile business. Did you know that many years ago, people used urine to bleach their teeth. That might explain why you don’t see the word “snogging” appear very often in earlier literature.
Participant[quote=temeculaguy] …but if the difference between 78 and 78.5 years of age is going to set the rest of you back a few hundred grand, just give me some morphine…
I would prefer to avoid copying the UK’s dental plan if at all possible, yikes!![/quote]
I think this is correct. The US system is often research driven, and not trying to play catch up with European longevity, but ironically, state run systems can add 0.5 years and may actually save a few hundred grand. But, I grew up in the UK and people grumbled continuously about the health care system, and it was always a major electoral issue. Dentistry used to be free as well, but that changed sometime ago. It is now private, expensive, and pushes the cosmetic smile business. Did you know that many years ago, people used urine to bleach their teeth. That might explain why you don’t see the word “snogging” appear very often in earlier literature.
Participant[quote=temeculaguy] …but if the difference between 78 and 78.5 years of age is going to set the rest of you back a few hundred grand, just give me some morphine…
I would prefer to avoid copying the UK’s dental plan if at all possible, yikes!![/quote]
I think this is correct. The US system is often research driven, and not trying to play catch up with European longevity, but ironically, state run systems can add 0.5 years and may actually save a few hundred grand. But, I grew up in the UK and people grumbled continuously about the health care system, and it was always a major electoral issue. Dentistry used to be free as well, but that changed sometime ago. It is now private, expensive, and pushes the cosmetic smile business. Did you know that many years ago, people used urine to bleach their teeth. That might explain why you don’t see the word “snogging” appear very often in earlier literature.
Participant[quote=temeculaguy] …but if the difference between 78 and 78.5 years of age is going to set the rest of you back a few hundred grand, just give me some morphine…
I would prefer to avoid copying the UK’s dental plan if at all possible, yikes!![/quote]
I think this is correct. The US system is often research driven, and not trying to play catch up with European longevity, but ironically, state run systems can add 0.5 years and may actually save a few hundred grand. But, I grew up in the UK and people grumbled continuously about the health care system, and it was always a major electoral issue. Dentistry used to be free as well, but that changed sometime ago. It is now private, expensive, and pushes the cosmetic smile business. Did you know that many years ago, people used urine to bleach their teeth. That might explain why you don’t see the word “snogging” appear very often in earlier literature.
-
AuthorPosts
