Do you think this country would be better off without suburbs?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Hopefully this doesn't turn into a new copycat trend...

But anyway, yes, it would be much much better. Yet for some reason many people think it's better to live in an extremely boring and sterile cultural wasteland with absolutely nothing to do besides your job than deal with a little crime.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

I don't really see how you could have dense urban areas without suburbs.  What's supposed to happen, you have big highrises and then BAM, it just cuts off and turns into rural farmland?

It's possible, my city is a lot like that. In fact strange as it sounds, we actually have part of a farm in the densely developed commerce district on the northside, drive down the main street there and you'll see a bank and an auto shop. And during farm season, between them will be a field of grain. Also, if you keep heading north out of the city, you'll see what is basically big box retailers plunked down into the middle of farmland. Sadly we do have some awful suburban developement on the far east side and some on the south, but it's not too difficult to imagine the city without it.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Actually I'd prefer something like this:

http://www.city-data.com/cpicv/vfiles8764.jpg
(big image, that's why it's clickable)

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Just offering BRTD a chance to live in a city away from those nasty boring suburbs. The houses just need a little work.  Call them fixer-uppers.

BTW Memphis I suspect that you never lived in or near Detroit, so  you really don't know what the hell you're talking about. If you talk to suburbanites around Detroit a frequent story you will hear is that they previously lived in a nice house in Detroit but were forced to move because of the rising crime rates.

No, but he most likely lives in Memphis which is a major city.

And I most certainly wouldn't enjoy Detroit, but I'll never live in that area anyway. Minneapolis is very nice, and much better than the horrible suburbs surrounding it. Even dazzleman has admitted the Twin Cities suburbs are quite horrid.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Seattle has a lower rate of apartment/condo living than its suburbs, by far.  In fact, I might even say that the majority of Seattle is suburban, yet it's one of the most liberal cities in the U.S., probably behind only San Francisco in social liberalness.

What are your opinion(s), BRTD and opebo, on that (beyond the strip club legislation, a horse you've beaten dead)?

Hence the problem with suburbs. They have prudish streaks, hence the strip club regulation. You wouldn't see that ever in Minneapolis, a liberal URBAN city.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Seattle has a lower rate of apartment/condo living than its suburbs, by far.  In fact, I might even say that the majority of Seattle is suburban, yet it's one of the most liberal cities in the U.S., probably behind only San Francisco in social liberalness.

What are your opinion(s), BRTD and opebo, on that (beyond the strip club legislation, a horse you've beaten dead)?

Hence the problem with suburbs. They have prudish streaks, hence the strip club regulation. You wouldn't see that ever in Minneapolis, a liberal URBAN city.

OK, it's good we ignored the "let's not beat a dead horse" part of my post.

Seattle passed it not because they're prudish, but because it lowers property values.  Why?  Because there are so few in the state that it is a major deal when one opens.  It gets more traffic than in most place.

I would point out, by the way, that there are only 16 in the state, 6 of which are in Seattle.  It isn't just a coincidence that there are only 10 outside of Seattle - it's just not popular here.  It has nothing to do with prudish laws elsewhere.

By the way, I can't get this link to work:

http://www.city-data.com/cpicv/vfiles8764.jpg

What page is it from?

Minneapolis. First one in the second row.

And there's the point, people in suburban areas are too concerned about property values. You can't make any place a red light district without people complaining. Minneapolis has a very nice red light district, and no one minds. If Seattle was a true urban city like it, it'd be the same.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Nonetheless, I feel that suburban-style developments (sprawl) are short-sighted and wasteful of resources (my town is constantly closing inner city schools and opening schools in the burbs) and that having separate suburban municipalities is parasitic to the inner city financially.

Yes. I have to ask if all the suburb lovers have ever been to the Twin Cities area. If so, you'd see how awful the sprawl and parasiticism is in the suburbs there.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Oh well, once the price of gas gets so high and the suburbs are abandoned, it will be fun to watch the ignorant GOP-trash lose everything they have and be shoved into tiny apartments to live the rest of their lives in poverty.

Ha ha, so true.

Not to mention the increased gas usage because of sprawl means more oil bought from the Middle East.

Suburbs support terrorism!

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

What makes your concern about strip clubs superior to concerns about property value, crime, etc.?

I don't care about property value, it just means cheaper housing. Crime doesn't bother me. It's not hard to avoid. And it's not just strip clubs. It's also good bars and good record stores.

Vashon Island, a Seattle suburb.  Increasingly wealthy waterside commuters.  30 minute ferry from the centre of Seattle.  About as Democratic as Minneapolis, but with 1/10th the crime.

First of all, that means it's full of yuppie latte liberal types I despise. And second, why should you have to go through the trouble and cost of a ferry every time you want to go to the city center?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Since I'm now done with the presentation of the class project I was working on last night, I can finally answer all the questions here in more entirety.

What makes your concern about strip clubs superior to concerns about property value, crime, etc.?

I don't care about property value, it just means cheaper housing. Crime doesn't bother me. It's not hard to avoid. And it's not just strip clubs. It's also good bars and good record stores.

Vashon Island, a Seattle suburb.  Increasingly wealthy waterside commuters.  30 minute ferry from the centre of Seattle.  About as Democratic as Minneapolis, but with 1/10th the crime.

First of all, that means it's full of yuppie latte liberal types I despise. And second, why should you have to go through the trouble and cost of a ferry every time you want to go to the city center?

I'm going to assume that you're not purposely avoiding my questions, and are instead simply missing them, so I'll restate the general idea: why does the fact that you dislike the thought of something mean that the country would be better off without something?  Last I checked, you live nowhere near Vashon Island and really are not affected by anything surrouding Vashon Island at all, and yet you seem to feel that it would be better for the residents of Vashon Island if it was a paved urban area with highrises and red light districts.

Is it not possible that the people of Vashon Island like their surroundings?

Well I'm not really bothered by Vashion Island, but it's just that, AN ISLAND. It has no real effect on the surrounding area. Other suburbs aren't quite the same.

What makes your concern about strip clubs superior to concerns about property value, crime, etc.?

I don't care about property value, it just means cheaper housing. Crime doesn't bother me. It's not hard to avoid. And it's not just strip clubs. It's also good bars and good record stores.

I had a somewhat close friend who was murdered a few years back walking through the red light district here.  I'm glad crime does not matter to you, and I'm sure he could have done a better job of avoiding it when he walked home from his job.

That's quite awful. But it doesn't mean it's likely to happen to me.

Last year there was 13 murders in Tacoma. That's 6.7 out of 100,000. That means you have a 0.0067% chance of being murdered in Tacoma. I'll also assume that a good portion of those are things such as gang on gang violence or domestic abuse type situations, meaning if you aren't involved in gangs or abusive relationships, the odds are even less. You have a much larger chance of dying in an auto accident, and the odds go higher on the congested roads caused by suburbs.

Now to look at Minneapolis, there was 46 murders last year, which is 12 out of 100,000. Almost twice that of Tacoma, but still not very high as that means a 0.012% chance of being murdered, which of course is much lower for non-gang members and the like. My aunt who has lived in Minneapolis for over 10 years has never even come close to being murdered.

Also, how many people go to the Minneapolis red light district daily? I can't give exact numbers, but it's a lot. I've seen as much as 200 people in Deja Vu before (the place is quite big). And that was just one time, not everyone who visited it that day. Of course that was one weekends, but I bet on some weekend nights they may get a total of over 500 customers. If we assume only 100 customers on the weeknights, that equals 1500 total customers that week, plus the staff and strippers. And how many of them are murdered? Then there's all the other strip clubs and "businesses" in the area. Deja Vu is by far the biggest business there, but even if we assume it makes up 10% of the area's commerce (which is quite a bit) that still equals 15,000 customers there per week + workers and strippers. And how many are murdered? At less than one murder a week, not many. I'd be drunk drivers are a bigger threat to you than organized crime in that area.

So why should I care about crime again?

In that case, Lake Forest Park - about 70% Democratic, a ten-minute bus ride from the city centre.

I doubt it's that short. It takes me more than 10 minutes to drive to my job, which actually is in a suburb, but in a much smaller urban area than the one you are talking about. Plus it takes at least 15 minutes for me to drive from my favorite record store in Minneapolis to the bars that have good indie shows, strip clubs, my aunt's house, etc. When I once drove from my other aunt's house in the suburbs to the strip clubs, it took a half hour.

If I say the place leans young, you'll complain there are yuppies; if it leans old, you will complain that it is not youthful enough.

Not neccesarily. Not all young people are yuppies. I just don't like young AFFLUENT areas. My city and Minneapolis are fine.

Since you have decided to hate everything but the inner city, why do you continue to bring it up?  If you are cemented in your beliefs, and can't change, why discuss?

That's not true. My city isn't a huge urban center, and I like it.

So why can't you have your urban city while we have our suburban city?  It seems to me that the existence of suburbs is not curtailing your ability to visit strip clubs, and the abolition of suburbs would not really affect you in any way.

Read memphis' posts. Suburbs are quite parasitic. Their sprawl is bad for the environment, they create things like the housing bubble, they cause urban decay, and effectively are one of the many factors leading to class stratification. Plus they are places where big box retailers including the evil Wal-Mart which is never a good thing.  Also they are largely the result of racism (you know why the term white flight exists?)

But if people want to live in their disgusting cookie cutter McMansions and their white picket fences, I guess I can't stop them. What they should not be able to do is set up their own bedroom communities to avoid city regulations and leech off the city. Nor should they care about what happens in the city. So if the suburbs were annexed to the city and they still had to pay city taxes and had a stake in how the city went, urban decay would approve, or we can add a suburban tax (which I support)

And even without all that, the people in the suburbs should MIND THEIR OWN BUSINESS and be content they can live in their disgusting sterile hellholes and not be concerned with things that go on in the city. See Twin Cities suburbanites protesting a recent "sex convention" that took place in Minneapolis or complaining about gay pride events and the like there. They don't live there, so quit bashing actually enlighened peopel and just go on living thier lives in their cookie cutter sterile lands ignoring the things that go on in places where things are actually interesting. You can bet I would not hate suburbs so much if suburbanites weren't so concerned about enforcing their disgusting beliefs on the enlighted city dwellers.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Alcon, BRTD, there is no such thing as a 'red light district' in an American city.  Such things do not exist, due to the illegality of prostitution and the vehement enforcement of these laws.

Well the Minneapolis one is full of strip clubs and sex businesses. There are also "massage parlors" and a few alleys that are places where hookers like to hang out which are largely ignored, the police are more concerned with only the drug dealers and gangs.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

But about those Minneapolis hookers.. what do they look like?

Pretty stereotypically whorish. None of them have ever been my thing. I've also been to some strip clubs that have reputations of being fronts for prostitution and I have to say the strippers there are far far less better looking than the ones at "legitimate" clubs.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

But about those Minneapolis hookers.. what do they look like?

Pretty stereotypically whorish. None of them have ever been my thing. I've also been to some strip clubs that have reputations of being fronts for prostitution and I have to say the strippers there are far far less better looking than the ones at "legitimate" clubs.

But of course!  In the US the police state makes sex so hard to get that a woman may make a handsome living merely teasing the male, without ever actually giving him anything for his money, if she is sufficiently good looking.  And by the same method, women who are quite unattractive may sell their bodies, even though they would not be worth much of anything in a 'free market'. 

Still better to be satisfied by a pig than ripped off by a great beauty, wouldn't you say?

a pig, no. Although my standards for sex are much lower than lapdances, no question. Typically, I would only be willing to buy a lapdance from about 20% of the strippers currently working when I'm at a strip club, however there are many strippers that I would never buy a lapdance from that I would have sex with in a heartbeat.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

I'm not sure how geographic connection has anything to do with affect on surrounding areas.  Are you any more affected by someplace connected by land to your part of the county than across a body of water?  Both have equal vote.  The latter is more likely to be in your legislative district, and Vashon is the only suburb (other than the standard lower middle class inner 'burbs) with which Seattle shares one.

Because islands aren't affected by sprawl.

Well, let's extend that.  Say you live in Minneapolis for 30 years.  Your 0.012% chance goes up to a 0.36% chance.  Now, let's say you know 50 other people in Minneapolis (which is reasonable for someone your age).  It's now nearly a 1-in-5 chance you'll know someone who will be murdered.  Not to mention that crime rates are higher in red light districts by a significant amount.  That considered, I'd wager that there's probably a 1-in-3 chance that you'll have a friend murdered in that timeblock if you live in a red light district.

Well my aunt doesn't know anyone who's been murdered. Gee, I wonder why? Maybe because she doesn't hang out with people involved in gangs and organized crime.

Also, she works at the University of Minnesota. There aren't that many U of M students murdered. I can't confirm it, but I'd bet none of those murders last year were students. I wonder why? See above paragraph. Are you saying there is no way you would attend such a university then if it was located in such a city?

By the way, your math is way off. 0.36% x 50 = 1.8%. Hardly 1-in-5.

Murder alone is not the only threat, obviously.  You are more likely than not to fall victim to a significant crime after 10 years in such an area.  Of course, I should point out that drunk drivers are more likely in red light districts and drunk driving is also a crime and, oh yeah, is counted under the murder statistic because it is vehicular manslaughter.

I don't think drunk driving is counted under murder because there were 0 murders in my city last year by that stat, which would not be the case if drunk driving deaths count, but no, drunk drivers are not more common in the red light district because most of the strip clubs are non-alcoholic, but that's all beside the point, the point is that visiting strip clubs in the area is safe. What do you think the odds that I will encounter crime every time I go there?

It depends on your definition of centre.  I should say "significant neighbourhood," that is, with entertainment and the like.

Even so, there's no way it's going to be only 15 minutes from a suburb. The good parts of Minneapolis are more than 15 minutes away from the main residential areas, and 30 minutes from the suburbs, as I mentioned.

Why not?

Because they aren't full of affluent yuppies. Rather, people like me.

I love refuting these arguments with Seattle.  I know it's one specific example, but since you're pretty much making a blanket assumption that all suburbs are bad...

1. The Seattle suburbs were specifically designed and maintained to avoid minimum environmental impact.  Lake Forest Park was the first planned community.  It was planned specifically to avoid cutting down trees.

2. The Seattle suburbs are oftentimes more diverse than Seattle.  The affluent suburbs of Bellevue and Redmond will probably be less white than Seattle come next Census.  The most diverse city in the Seattle metro area is Renton - a suburb.  Here, the minorities are going to the suburbs because housing prices are oftentimes lower even though incomes aren't significantly.

3. Mankato has a Wal-Mart.  Most Seattle suburbs don't, because residents protest whenever they try to move here.

Well until lapdances are legal in Seattle, living in that area is out of the picture for me. But if that horrible repressive prudish law is turned down, why live in the suburbs when I can live in the city proper, and those suburbs are probably still full of yuppies as the whole area is, not real liberals.

I'm not claiming that McMansion areas aren't dumb (although around here they help the Democrats).  Rather, I'm complaining that your idea of suburb is fundamentally flawed.  There are virtually no McMansion areas around here.  Most suburbs are either densely-populated with lots of apartments and white collar workers or sparsely populated and full of environmentalists.  Your idea of a suburb is not necessarily universal.  I just want you to admit that not all suburbs suck to the degree that you claim.

Such areas do not sound like suburbs then. Is Camden a suburb? It is technically, but it doesn't have McMansions. And it usually isn't considered suburban. Brooklyn Center, one north of Minneapolis doesn't suck either. But look at the stats. It's not suburban! And even then the only reason I'd be willing to live there is it is closer to the red light district than south Minneapolis.

The Twin Cities' suburbs are generally Republican and conservative, which not all suburbs are.

You can find an exception for everything. I could say which all suburbs except Seattle's are, and be right.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

There was a brilliant bit on Sesame Street about this which is surprising considering its audience who would have no clue. But basically some lumberjack-looking muppet is wandering through a hilly prairie and starts singing about how much he loves the great outdoors and nature instead of living in a crowded urban area. Then behind him construction crews come in and begin to destroy the area, but he still keeps singing and apparently doesn't notice it. When the song's done he's surrounded by a bunch of malls, fast food restaurants and chain stores and doesn't notice until then that the "wide open spaces" he loves so much are no longer there.

That's basically what your typical exurbanite is like.