Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
The Oldest Man
Jul 28, 2003

sit on my Facebook posted:

I imagine that even if it were feasible, Amazon would probably rather the customer gently caress off and shop at home.

Checkmate, bigboxailures https://www.amazon.com/b?node=16008589011

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

The Oldest Man
Jul 28, 2003

LogisticEarth posted:

It wasn't entirely clear since he said he just realized it, and a lot of folks think huge parking lots are some excessive mistake rather than a calculated and designed feature.

As to capital vs. humans... maybe a good narrative but it's far from that simple. Part of the reason we developed "the mall" was that we moved towards giant block zoning and sprawl. This was as much a problem of planning and government management as it was capital. The reason malls and big box stores need giant lots that are often empty is because they are a sort of "monocrop" that is tied to a single industry that is very seasonally variable, compounded with the whole transportation and regional planning clusterfuck that ties us to a car-centric economy.

In other words, malls designers are partially responding to overall transportation and regional planning issues. And customer desire for easy parking.

This. American cities being hosed up mutated slime molds compared to Europe or Asia in terms of density and transit is not a market failure, it's a regulatory and subsidy failure. We spent decades making those development patterns more profitable by subsidizing everything from massive detached home construction in the burbs to freeway construction. And then, when enough of the population was in those inherently unsustainable developments, they started voting themselves parking requirements.

We hosed ourselves, and we can't even blame the baby boomers.

The Oldest Man
Jul 28, 2003

fishmech posted:

You are giving way too much credit to European and Asian cities for being well designed and not sprawl, because tons of them are poorly designed and sprawl like crazy.

Also "it's unsustainable" is bullshit. Things that have lasted close on 80 years can hardly be said to not sustain. The modern "good city" you so praise isn't much older than the suburb you claim can't work long term. Do not say "unsustainable" as if it means "aesthetics I don't like".
The outer fringe of development is always lovely, but once you get a few miles in there tends to be an organic densification over the long term. Among other things this tends to turn pure bedroom communities or bedrooms plus strip malls into employment centers in their own right (the edge city process) which creates ever lessened dependence or even interaction with the old core.

It's also perfectly practical to add transit in, that's what happened in the first place with cities. Very few were intentionally designed to support it, it had to be retrofitted in and it tended to bring its own densification. Most of those places will never get more than an ok bus system any time soon - but there's also plenty of small and medium European and Asian cities that basically just have an ok bus system for transit with maybe a passenger rail stop to go the nearest big city.

They're sustainable as long as we keep hurling subsidies into them:
https://www.strongtowns.org/the-growth-ponzi-scheme/

Unsustainable means, literally, financial liabilities that outweigh tax collection potential in the given development. As long as we're all willing to engage in the shared delusion that this growth pattern is not a major government project that we spend billions of dollars on, and we never for even a second contemplate about stopping, sure. It's fine. This is fine.

The Oldest Man fucked around with this message at 06:25 on Jun 28, 2017

The Oldest Man
Jul 28, 2003

It's because the FHA made any development pattern except curvilinear car suburbs financially nonviable after 1955, hope that helps.

The Oldest Man
Jul 28, 2003


My take on Marx is that his diagnosis was more or less dead on, but his prescription doesn't work. The cure not working doesn't mean capitalism is any less of a disease, though.

The Oldest Man
Jul 28, 2003

Cicero posted:

Yeah except the point Fox News is trying to make is "see they're not really poor" whereas my point is "yes they're still poor and that sucks but it's still true that some things have improved over time". If you can't see the difference between those two points I'm sorry.

What happens when the greed of those at the top becomes so extreme that we start regressing and even objective measures of quality of life begin to decline over time? Rhetorical question. https://www.theverge.com/2017/12/21/16805384/life-expectancy-us-opioid-epidemic

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

The Oldest Man
Jul 28, 2003

PT6A posted:

I'm amazed they've hung on this long between Amazon and my ability to impulse buy and download any game for a modern console or PC that catches my eye instantly while sitting on my couch in my ginch. What purpose do they serve?

They arbitrage people's second-hand game sales. They are a pawn shop.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply