Not Just Bikes / r/fuckcars / Urbanists / New Urbanism / Car-Free / Anti-Car - People and grifters who hate personal transport, freedom, cars, roads, suburbs, and are obsessed with city planning and urban design

[Chuck McGill]

You know those niggers you think about so much *also drive cars*?

Now who's the one obsessed with niggers? I mentioned joggers offhand at the end of a post that mostly referred to social undesirables in a very general way, you've mentioned them in every single post since the one I made.

Setting that aside, requiring a car to get into a neighborhood isn't a foolproof solution but it keeps out a lot of the worst elements. If you can't see a practical difference between needing a $2000 beater car to get somewhere and needing a $5 bus pass to get somewhere, I really don't know what more I can tell you. Keeping out some of the undesirables is better than keeping out none of them. You're literally arguing like a redditor, poking logic holes in some minor irrelevant part of the argument then going "CHECKMATE ATHEISTS"

 

[FlipTopBox]

@Freya You seem to be in the wrong thread. I think https://kiwifarms.net/threads/i-hate-pro-bughive-channels.120626/ or https://kiwifarms.net/threads/public-transportation-free-travel-and-the-cult-of-the-urbanite.115974/ might be more your speed.

Edit: And to everyone else in the thread, stop feeding the obvious troll.

 

[Freya]

Now who's the one obsessed with niggers? I mentioned joggers offhand at the end of a post that mostly referred to social undesirables in a very general way, you've mentioned them in every single post since the one I made.

Setting that aside, requiring a car to get into a neighborhood isn't a foolproof solution but it keeps out a lot of the worst elements. If you can't see a practical difference between needing a $2000 beater car to get somewhere and needing a $5 bus pass to get somewhere, I really don't know what more I can tell you. Keeping out some of the undesirables is better than keeping out none of them. You're literally arguing like a redditor, poking logic holes in some minor irrelevant part of the argument then going "CHECKMATE ATHEISTS"

You're right man. We should just continue stagnating economically because of your weird irrational fear.

 

[Chuck McGill]

You're right man. We should just continue stagnating economically because of your weird irrational fear.

>you need to ride the bus or else line won't go up

Oh no, Blackrock will only be able to grift 15 billion this year instead of 20 billion. How will I ever recover? Better just abandon everything that isn't serving the almighty GDP.

 

[Meriasek]

You know those niggers you think about so much *also drive cars*?

They do, but I think the advantage of cars over busses and trains is that you don't have to sit next to niggers in your own car.

Yet.

 

[Car Won't Crank]

You're right man. We should just continue stagnating economically because of your weird irrational fear.

Something complex like economic stagnation won't magically be fixed by investing in public transport. Even the car companies are stagnating due to this EV push which is driven by retarded politics.

 

[Skeletonized Cow]

You're right man. We should just continue stagnating economically because of your weird irrational fear.

I'm sorry, but between car manufacturers and public transport, who is struggling economically? Because it certainly seems to be public transport.

 

[The ShekelMonster]

I just read through nearly half of the thread. Pretty entertaining (and occasionally mind numbing) stuff. I was actually hoping to find a thread on the fuck cars types after seeing a lot of yelling about “walkable cities” and finding a thread that feels pretty relevant.
Evokes the feeling of r/Im14andthis is deep:
View attachment 4204142
Long ass post about how we used to be able to play in the streets before cars took over:

Great find, and good followup from FILTH Tourist. I'd really love a source for the longer post though if you have it. I can only find the original, and transcribing such a long post is a lot of work. It also adds something to have the direct link.

I these guys have a warped perception of reality and history. Roads, sidewalks, and the division of traffic has existed for thousands of years. Do you know why romans built sidewalks into the streets of their cities? It isn't because of lobbying from big chariot, it's because roads are intended for wagons and cargo pulled by animals and animals are fucking filthy. Sidewalks exist as a health and safety measure not just so you don't get trampled or ran over by horses, wagons, marching soldiers, and cars, but to keep people out of the mud, filth, shit, and sewage. People were not driven from the roads because they didn't want to be there in the first place.

This idea that before cars people played and danced in the street is retarded.

It sure is.

Here's Pompeii from thousands of years ago, complete with sidewalks and even stones to allow the pedestrians to cross from one side to another. Get a load of this Car InFRAsTruCture.

And here's New York. Boy would children ever love playing on this street with no wheeled vehicles. Also, I definitely never played road hockey on the street of the quiet suburb I grew up in. So children literally never play in the streets now that cars have been invented.

 

[LaxerBRO]

Why do conservtards make every issue about their us vs them culture wars? I think you just wanted an excuse to talk about black people

I would be fine with these individuals pushing for a plan to end single family zoning and letting the market decide if the area should have multiple resident residences but they always seem to take it a step further. However, instead of just letting builders decide they make it mandatory to build more housing:

One of the most important tools in California’s arsenal is a law requiring local governments to make room for enough housing to meet projected demand. The law lacked teeth until it was modified in 2017.

However, when it comes to the area where more of the politicians live, those communities have an exemption:

Marin County, the suburban enclave north of the Golden Gate bridge, isn’t interested in having riff-raff — meaning ordinary Californians — despoil its bucolic ambience.

For the past half-century, Marin’s very affluent residents and their politicians have waged a largely successful campaign, under the guise of environmental consciousness, to slow population growth to a trickle by allowing very little new housing to be built.
...

Seven years ago, the county’s legislators carried legislation giving Marin a partial exemption from state housing quotas and last year a five-year extension of Marin’s special treatment was buried in a state budget “trailer bill” signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Marin County resident before becoming governor.

Okay, so the politicians exempted themselves from mandatory high density building codes but what about these new units that are required to be built? Well, you see when they want to get rid of zoning laws they only focus on certain ones. Others for example impose so many regulations that a building cannot be built without providing some of the units for affordable housing.

But what is the issue with that?

The issue is that when someone gets something for free or subsidized by the public, they treat that thing with less care and respect. It's not there money so why do they care? Even if maintenance fees fess go up for the low income people, the cost is subsidized by the market rate tenants.

Hell, even the Black bitches on Lipstick Alley understand this:

So now I am paying more money for maintenance and other fees because a bunch of feral Niggers are not taking care of amenities / common areas such the apartment is robbing me of more of my hard earned income, which is just a de facto tax.

Finally, we have these anti-car people that either want to ban cars or make using them much more difficult. It not just having public transit available, but these people have advocated to limit busy city boulevards to single lanes with the other two to three lanes taken up by a park, huge sidewalks, or mass transit only lanes. So why do they want this?

I suspect, most of the people that like living in urban areas have issues with crime, rampant public drug use, homelessness, the mentally ill and other negative aspects. But these people have to spend money on capeshit, be a sneakerhead, or go to burning man. The last thing they want to do is spend their disposable income or free time to resolve the issues they face. Rather its to problem of society or government. In fact, just watch a few Not Just Bikes videos and Jason complains that people that have escaped the cities have "robbed" urban areas of tax dollars.

Thus the final goal is revealed:​

They want to make life in the suburbs hell so you will come back to the cities. When you do so, you will have your taxes go to the cities coffers and be taxed in a de facto manner by subsidizing the poor people. Finally, the fuckcars people are hoping that if those taxes are not enough, making you suffer from urban hell will make you more malleable to vote for more taxes. ​

This shit is noting new, it was attempted after desegregation when Black schools were shit. Here was their plan:

It was this practice, in L.A. and elsewhere, that gave rise to mandatory busing as a potential remedy to the harms of segregation. The idea was that schools for all students would improve if white students had to share the fate of black students.

Children on a school bus, riding from the suburbs to an inner city school, Charlotte, North Carolina

This shit is just repackaged Marxism* same as the Green New Deal.

P.S. I just want to address how progressive policies and talking points usually fail to meet reality. A talking point against suburbs is that the US education system is funded by property taxes and since Whites own more property and have higher home equity; White schools are better funded than Black schools resulting in better educational outcomes.

Below are two images, one is the funding for Detroit Public schools and one for the Lewiston, Idaho School district in the general region where I live. Detroit Public Schools gets $13.369 in funding per student and the Lewiston School District gets $8,577. The cost of living difference between the closest major city and Detroit is 0%. Lewiston, Idaho is not some ritzy city with a bunch of tech startups and Fortune 500 companies. The main employee is a fucking paper mill.

As we see below, the test scores for Detroit are in the toilet and the scores for Lewiston are slightly above average to slightly below average.




Data is taken from the single public high school is Lewiston, ID and Central High School in Detroit via a Great Schools scoring.

 

[Car Won't Crank]

Great find, and good followup from FILTH Tourist. I'd really love a source for the longer post though if you have it. I can only find the original, and transcribing such a long post is a lot of work. It also adds something to have the direct link.


It sure is.
View attachment 4267412
Here's Pompeii from thousands of years ago, complete with sidewalks and even stones to allow the pedestrians to cross from one side to another. Get a load of this Car InFRAsTruCture.

View attachment 4267452
And here's New York. Boy would children ever love playing on this street with no wheeled vehicles. Also, I definitely never played road hockey on the street of the quiet suburb I grew up in. So children literally never play in the streets now that cars have been invented.

Wait until the redditards learn about the Hippodrome of Constantinople. I wonder if they'd implode with reeee after learning that chariot racing, basically the precursor to NASCAR was super popular among its citizens in Byzantium.

 

[John Freeman]

>you need to ride the bus or else line won't go up

Oh no, Blackrock will only be able to grift 15 billion this year instead of 20 billion. How will I ever recover? Better just abandon everything that isn't serving the almighty GDP.

I think this discussion is going in a retarded direction.
Trains, busses, and light rail are awesome for efficiency. They can move a lot of people around with relatively little energy and space. In countries like Switzerland or Sweden, where competent leadership allocate sufficient resources to social programs, public transport is efficient, robust, and comfortable. For most people living in those countries, it's an enticing alternative to automobiles. I think it's also worth nothing that the two countries I mentioned have some of the strongest economies on the planet.

The United States is the polar opposite. Not only is it a significantly larger country, both geographically and in terms of population, the government is run by people who grew up in the golden age of the automobile, in cities purpose built for cars, and know nothing else. The few dollars allocated into public transportation are spent by cities, counties, and states. And those already sparse funds are often misused, wasted, or embezzled. Our public transportation system is filthier, slower, and less maintained than European and Asian ones, not to mention disjointed and uncoordinated. The Americans who do use public transport don't have anything nice to say about it, and with reason. If it were up to them, they would be driving, and that's a problem that needs solving.

But until then, pro-public transport pundits need to stop demonizing people who drive everywhere. If you can afford a vehicle and fuel in the United States, there is no reason to take the train anywhere, ever. America is a country founded on the key value of liberty. Cars are fast, loud, and dangerous. They're an icon of freedom. You can travel anywhere in style and relative comfort, on your own dollar and time. Of course Americans love cars. Thats not going to change anytime soon. But you can't get mad about that, because they don't have a viable alternative anyways. And the people getting genuinely angry at people who would prefer to drive overwhelmingly seem to come from high income areas with robust public transport. 95% of America isn't in your upper-middle class west/east coast utopian bubble where you can walk 15 minutes to a bus stop or streetcar station. Most of this country isn't gentrified like that, so get off your high horse.

But also, it's worth considering that if America does revamp its public transport network, you should try it.

 

[Xarpho's Return]

@LaxerBRO, funny you mention bussing kids, they often blame muh cars and muh car culture why kids don't walk to school, but the reality is the school districts are gerrymandered to hell and the closest school may be miles away thanks to redestricting, just another example of how government has "improved" things.

This is a map of the elementary school districts of College Station, Texas. (source with uncropped map)

Note the "islands" in the north part of town, these are trailer parks/subsidized apartments/etc. to "balance" the schools in the wealthier southern areas. While it does disproportionately the poorer areas, it destroys any "why aren't school areas walkable" argument. There's a part of the map near College Hills, where instead of walking a mile to school (and not crossing a single major roadway), the powers that be ordained that your school is now six miles to the south.

 

[WelperHelper99]

Wait until the redditards learn about the Hippodrome of Constantinople. I wonder if they'd implode with reeee after learning that chariot racing, basically the precursor to NASCAR was super popular among its citizens in Byzantium.

View attachment 4269444

People have had vehicles since we discovered that wood could float and wheels could roll. Same with racing, it was just horse powered. Once you realize that, you understand that they're trying to destroy a way of life and sports we've had for thousands of years.

 

[DamnWolves!]

Having something of your own is always going to be preferable to a common space unless it's literally outside your budget (like, say, tennis courts).

That's the reality. People like privacy; that way they can choose to be in public or not. Ever notice how you prefer to have the bedroom door closed when you're sleeping, even if you live alone? That shit is innate.

Even the modern home is divided into private and public spaces--you average 2 bd, 2bth starter home will have a living room with some windows that face the street for light, but then it will also have a "family room", which usually has no view to the street, but instead windows or a connection to the backyard. It should be no surprise that families tend to spend more time in the latter than the former.

Just having your kitchen visible from the street is weird; I can't imagine the subconscious toll it must take on a person who has to mingle with the public in order to do literally anything outside of watch TV and take a shit.

That’s the other bone I have to pick with them is how dangerous cities have become because of their shitty politics. What point is there to having a bike if it’s just going to get stolen by some hobo? Why would you want more walking infrastructure if it increases your chances of getting shanked?

I took the subway in my city for the first time in like 10 years to pick up something off of Craigslist and some crazy dude punched me in the shoulder from behind and then yelled at me while I had headphones in. This time it was a punch; next time it could be a needle stick. It's way worse now than it was back then, even if the cars are newer and air conditioned--decent AC comes a lot lower on Mazlow's hierarchy than safety...

 

[WelperHelper99]

That's the reality. People like privacy; that way they can choose to be in public or not. Ever notice how you prefer to have the bedroom door closed when you're sleeping, even if you live alone? That shit is innate.

Even the modern home is divided into private and public spaces--you average 2 bd, 2bth starter home will have a living room with some windows that face the street for light, but then it will also have a "family room", which usually has no view to the street, but instead windows or a connection to the backyard. It should be no surprise that families tend to spend more time in the latter than the former.

Just having your kitchen visible from the street is weird; I can't imagine the subconscious toll it must take on a person who has to mingle with the public in order to do literally anything outside of watch TV and take a shit.

I took the subway in my city for the first time in like 10 years to pick up something off of Craigslist and some crazy dude punched me in the shoulder from behind and then yelled at me while I had headphones in. This time it was a punch; next time it could be a needle stick. It's way worse now than it was back then, even if the cars are newer and air conditioned--decent AC comes a lot lower on Mazlow's hierarchy than safety...

Sorry for hearing about that man, hope you're OK.
But to be on point things like privacy and safety, even things like control of the AC, are so much better in a car. Not just that, you can choose the car that's best for you, both from a practical and style perspective. Want to slap a sticker on it? You can, not like it's a train.

 

[Xarpho's Return]

Even the modern home is divided into private and public spaces--you average 2 bd, 2bth starter home will have a living room with some windows that face the street for light, but then it will also have a "family room", which usually has no view to the street, but instead windows or a connection to the backyard. It should be no surprise that families tend to spend more time in the latter than the former.

That's a long-standing tradition, generally, the living room was for entertaining guests and the family room/den was where the television or other leisure equipment is.

 

[Markass the Worst]

The Daily Rake is on a roll this past week, Semper Fi to you @The ShekelMonster for taking up the torch while I was busy writing the Aella_Girl OP.

PSA: Deboonking the Traffic Soyboys Part 5 - Don't be a NIMBY, just be a Rootless Cosmopolitan Instead - The Daily Rake

In the second piece in the Traffic Soyboys Series I made a strong argument against the existence of zoning laws, at least as practiced in the US/Canada. I doubled down on this in the third piece, and I stand by most of what I said. It is utterly ridiculous that you have to get into a car in...

dailyrake.ca

(archive)
I haven't covered NIMBYism/YIMBYism much but I already hate the term "NIMBY" because it's as retarded a term as "stroad" or "induced demand".

PSA: Deboonking the Traffic Soyboys 6 - The non-Soy and non-Capitalist Argument for Land Usage Restriction - The Daily Rake

In the second entry in this series I made a very strong argument against zoning laws. After all, there’s no real reason why you should have to get in your car and drive to anything. The zoning that leads to this has never been put up to a ballot, and is about as democratic as everything else our...

dailyrake.ca

(archive)

PSA: Deboonking the Traffic Soyboys Part 7 - It's not About Walkability, it's About Fuck Cars - The Daily Rake

I especially enjoyed part 4 of our series here, where we took on the total refusal for these antifas to acknowledge that crime is more important than a lack of bike lanes. This is something universally denied by the Armchair Urbanists, although everyone in real life knows this to be true...

dailyrake.ca

(archive)
Here he covers CityNerd's retardation which tbh I haven't done much of, but I'm not surprised he argues against multilevel parking garages even though it takes up less surface space than the big giant surface parking lots urbanists regularly complain about. Also love the part where the argument about "muh capacity not being used" is covered and refuted.

PSA: Deboonking the Traffic Soyboys Part 8 - The Majestic Creatures that Urbanites Apparently Never Herd of - The Daily Rake

At the end of the last entry I yelled myself hoarse claiming that there was this transportation device that cars made go the way of the Dodo. These things were everywhere, and had been for thousands of years, but I didn’t want to saddle an article that was already over 7k words with any more...

dailyrake.ca

(archive)
Covers horses, which like crime, urbanists never talk about because it's inconvenient to their narrative. At the start he completely demolishes the non sequitur that cars are "inefficient" whatever the hell that means.

As a side note it does strike me as really strange that I cannot recall a single instance of urbanists ever talking about horses. That's probably because bringing it up would contradict their entire narrative about muh evil car industry stealing the streets from pedestrians, as covered in the article.

PSA: Deboonking the Traffic Soyboys Part 9 - Dunking on San Francisco and Urbanites Again Ignoring Crime - The Daily Rake

After finishing the last piece, where I argued that automobiles are horses, but better – something that isn’t controversial amongst 99% of humanity – I stumbled upon this video of old time Paris, France. Check out the wheel free paradise they had, with children playing and adults gossiping right...

dailyrake.ca

(archive)
In this he refutes the videos of City Beautiful, another urbanist Youtuber that's more mellow and toned down than Jason and the others but still full of bullshit. I haven't gotten around to covering him (there is a lot of urbanist retardation spewed about on the Internet) but I've seen him a lot.

I didn't even know his videos of "car-free streets" had streets that were completely devoid of pedestrians, that shit is just funny to me. It will never not be hilarious seeing urbanists' ideas be implemented only for it to be a failure, almost like traffic engineering is a complicated multifaceted discipline and simplifying it down to "cars bad" doesn't work.

Public Transit Down Massively in Canada/America Mostly Due to Crime, According to Actual Transiters - The Daily Rake

CBC: Last week, the Toronto Transit Commission announced a 10 cent fare hike — raising single cash fares to $3.35 — while also reducing services to address a $366 million budget shortfall. It’s another hit to consumers like Fairchild, who are already paying higher cost-of-living expenses due to...

dailyrake.ca

(archive)

PSA: Deboonking the Traffic Soyboys Part 11 - "Induced Demand" is not "Proportionally Induced Demand", and Yes, Build More Roads - The Daily Rake

All the way back in the very first piece I mentioned the term “induced demand,” and how it shows the superficiality of the knowledge of the Traffic Troons. I was considering leaving it at that, but they use and abuse this term enough to put anyone into a homicidal rage, especially since they...

dailyrake.ca

(archive)

In this he does a beautiful takedown of """induced demand""" by applying the same logic to military strategy and computer hard drive space. Every time I read about induced demand it hurts my brain to comprehend how people truly believe building more of something is bad because it will just be used up.

I also notice that "muh capacity not being used" (ie "cars spend 96% of the time being parked" and "8 parking spots exist for every car in America" non sequiturs from Part 7 and 8) is trotted out against cars but when capacity ends up being used fully it's called "induced demand" and is taken as a point against cars. It's almost like they don't have any principles other than cars bad.

Urbanists will probably just say "but the military and hard drive space stuff is different" even though the logic is the exact same. After all they say that whenever you ask if induced demand applies to transit and biking. Like this Oh The Urbanity video:

"What People Get Wrong About Induced Demand"

The video isn't that bad but I notice they drop the "people will fill up its capacity" argument entirely and start talking about things in terms of costs and benefits like a mature adult instead of going "JUST ONE MORE LANE BRO" like a spastic. So at the end of the day the "induced demand" argument isn't even a real argument and it just sounds like one so they can dunk on cars because cars bad. If you have to radically change your argument to make it make sense then it's a terrible argument and should never be used.

---

Wendover Productions released a video about why Amtrak sucks (it's because freight rail keeps having right of way over passenger rail).

"The One Tiny Law That Keeps Amtrak Terrible"

Alan Fisher (the guy who went on a rant because Wendover never states his opinion in his videos) quickly commented shortly after release.




Jason Slaughter followed suit after.



So it seems like urbanists are taking positively to Wendover now? I notice he managed to make them happy without having to shit on cars, but only because he seems to have simplified the situation as this comment points out.



Of course there's still plenty of urbanist retardation permeating the comments section.



I wonder when urbanists will not only advocate for "muh other countries" transportation systems but also their social norms of not taking kindly to people shitting up public spaces that hold back the US & Canada's transit systems.

---

Jason accuses Scottsdale residents of wanting to avoid taxes(???)




source (a)

Nothing in the linked NYT article talks about taxes. And I don't believe the narrative that suburbia is subsidized (and not, say, cities or public transit). Of course Jason handwaves away people's counterarguments that their suburbs are existing just fine with "they're too new."

To me this just seems like a case of bad planning (the NYT article goes over a loophole developers used so they didn't have to prove where their houses' water would come from) and nothing fundamentally wrong with suburbia, same thing as all the other examples urbanists use to argue suburbs bad.

---

Science Says(TM) carbrains are real! And here's a new neologism to boot: "Motornormativity".


source (a)

And if you're thinking "that sounds like the retarded concept of 'heteronormativity'", you'd be right:



Heteronormativity is possibly the worst possible concept to compare it to. I shouldn't have to point out that straight people are "prioritized" because they're the only people that can produce babies and continue the human race, and it's not because people have some sort of innate bias for straight people or innate bias against the gays. But whatever.

Here's a sample of questions from the study:



I shouldn't have to point out this reddit-tier argument proves fucking nothing. You can ask people questions like this all day and it turns out people are not perfectly logical machines operating on pure principle but rather they see situations differently all the time.

And most of the time it's because those situations are fucking different. Like questions (Ai) and (Aii). (Ai) is just what normal people call "parking" and (Aii) is when the person is just being a total dumbass. There's nothing in common between the two unless in (Ai) the driver left the keys in the ignition with the doors unlocked for some reason (but the question doesn't specify).

---

Jason continues on criticizing the Holy Land Of Car-Free Living for not being a country entirely devoid of cars.


source (a)

The blog post he's referring to is this one from 2019. David Hembrow laments how the amount of cars and driving is increasing in the Netherlands and blames it on people being paid 20 cents per kilometer thus encouraging longer commutes (the question of why people wouldn't dislike having longer commutes is not answered) and the cycling network "not being appealing enough". Yes, the best cycling network in the world is not appealing enough to stop cars from being the mode of transport chosen often by the Dutch, and for some reason this is a point in favor of cycling? Therefore we must clamp down on driving even harder than the Netherlands already is.

But this guy is really hilarious, because not only does he dislike cars, he dislikes buses, trains and planes too because of muh climate change and accuses buses, trains and planes of killing people too. At least he calls out the fact that public transport is given out for free (which is the definition of a subsidy) in the Netherlands. But he wants air travel to be taxed along with all long distance travel in general.

As always, this just proves it's never good enough for these people. It's not even enough after they ban cars, they'll just go after buses, trains and planes for being environmentally unfriendly (supposedly) next. And David Hembrow gave away the whole game in 2019. Thanks, David.

---

And finally, Jason has uploaded another video in his Strong Towns series.

He goes over the "Give Yourself The Green Light" General Motors propaganda film from the 1950's. There's really nothing new here. He whines about "stroads" and "induced demand" and keeps going on about how building tons of asphalt results in infrastructure liabilities and bankrupting cities (while failing to name one bankrupt city) and how drivers are subsidized (and transit isn't? but seriously, infrastructure in general is subsidized, car or not, because it has positive economic benefits). It's funny how he creates his own propaganda to counter the motor throating actual carbrains of the 1950's.

Honestly I think he's just ran out of ideas at this point.

 

[quaawaa]

Jason accuses Scottsdale residents of wanting to avoid taxes(???)




source (a)

Nothing in the linked NYT article talks about taxes. And I don't believe the narrative that suburbia is subsidized (and not, say, cities or public transit). Of course Jason handwaves away people's counterarguments that their suburbs are existing just fine with "they're too new."

To me this just seems like a case of bad planning (the NYT article goes over a loophole developers used so they didn't have to prove where their houses' water would come from) and nothing fundamentally wrong with suburbia, same thing as all the other examples urbanists use to argue suburbs bad.

Regarding Scottsdale, a developer was freeloading off of Scottsdale’s water supply, and Scottsdale cut them off. The water supply isn’t in danger for either Scottsdale or the new development as there are other sources of water available:

Scottsdale statement and facts - Rio Verde Foothills water​

By Scottsdale Office of Communication

January 16, 2023

City of Scottsdale statement and facts regarding Rio Verde Foothills water
Rio Verde is a separate community governed by Maricopa County, not the City of Scottsdale. Scottsdale has warned and advised that it is not responsible for Rio Verde for many years, especially given the requirements of the City’s mandated drought plan. The city remains firm in that position, and confident it is on the right side of the law.
Nothing in the city's action precludes residents in Rio Verde Foothills from purchasing water from other sources. The water haulers who have previously hauled water from Scottsdale have access to water from other jurisdictions and are still offering to haul water to serve the homes in Rio Verde.
Rio Verde Foothills Facts

• Rio Verde Foothills lies within unincorporated Maricopa County, the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors is their local government.
• In the past, water haulers were allowed to fill-up tanks at City of Scottsdale fill stations. These water haulers are largely commercial enterprises. Given the unprecedented drought on the Colorado River, the city ceased allowing any of this water to be transported outside of the City in compliance with its Drought Management Plan. This means the water haulers Rio Verde has relied upon must find another source of water to haul. They have found other sources of water and are still offering to haul water to serve the homes in Rio Verde.
• The physical infrastructure, staff, operations and water rights that comprise Scottsdale Water - the city's municipal water utility - have been designed, built and financed (through user rates and fees) by the residents and businesses of Scottsdale, for the users of the system.
• Scottsdale has a 100-year Assured Water Supply as certified by the Arizona Department of Water Resources. That assured water supply designation applies to the city's population at build-out - it does not account for residents outside its service area who are not connected to the City’s water utility delivery system.

Facts, history and background information
A Dec. 19 memo prepared in response to a petition to the Scottsdale City Council provides facts, a history of this issue and more information regarding the city's position.

• Download and read the memo here (PDF).

Source (Archive)

Scottsdale also should be considered the principal city of the Phoenix metro area. “Car dependent” (yet still “walkable”) Old Town Scottsdale is way, way, better than “transit-oriented“ Downtown Phoenix. More restaurants, more natural beauty, more stores, no homeless, free parking; Old Town is better in every way. The actual city sucks and is subsidized by the wealthy residents of suburbs like Scottsdale.

Not going to get into details about Arizona’s water supply, but they actually do a good job and in many cases there, sprawl actually decreases water usage because the new houses use less water than the farms that they’re replacing. Arizona uses less water today than it did in 1957 when it had a significantly smaller population. California is to blame for mismanagement of the Colorado River; every other state party to the compact does a good job managing the limited resource and planning for the future.

 

[Xarpho's Return]

I haven't covered NIMBYism/YIMBYism much but I already hate the term "NIMBY" because it's as retarded a term as "stroad" or "induced demand".

It's an older term than "stroad" for sure but I think it was back in the 1970s when people (particularly out of California) were concerned with freeways, nuclear power plants, and other unpleasantries around them, but now is a slur for people who don't want to see their neighborhood disappear in favor of multi-story bughives. Ironically, the NIMBYs of the past were probably closer to their views than they'd like to admit.

 

[Bani]

Slight PL, but I've spoken with Jason personally. He is an enormous douche, and he flies off the handle the moment you even allude to any kind of relationship his personal wealth might have to his ideology (he has an extremely cushy six-figure online "job" that allows him to live wherever he wants.) I've seen him go off on a couple of people for pointing out that his ideology of "fuck fixing my own shitty country, that's everyone else's problem. I'm gonna go move to the Netherlands and preach about how living there makes me so much better than all you unhealthy losers," is entitled and privileged as fuck. If by his own admission his videos aren't for the purpose of "fixing," these places, then they're basically just bragging and schadenfreude.

Also, this is neither here nor there, but all the Dutch people I've talked to about this really do not want Americans and Canadians moving to the Netherlands. They're the ones who had to work to make Amsterdam such a nice place to live, yet a bunch of rich American liberals are flooding in because they fucked up their own country and gave up on fixing it. As much as Jason jerks himself off about how much of a saint he is for living in Amsterdam, the locals aren't fond of his breed of transplant at all. I guaran-fucking-tee you guys that Jason still owns and regularly drives a car or even multiple cars, and that's to say nothing of the enormous carbon footprint he leaves with his constant air travel. He's the environmental equivalent to a champagne socialist, and it doesn't surprise me that he's chummy with literal champagne socialist breadtubers.