Quote:
Originally posted by Say_hello_for_me
I know this was unwelcome to many of the NIMBY "libertarians" and mostly-Rightists here two weeks ago, but this is yet another example of problems we wouldn't need to solve if subsidized and public housing were fairly distributed. First, the suburbs end as scared honkies don't have to keep running away (no, Sebby really did just want a one acre lot because he really, really likes planting an apple orchard!). Then, as people say, "fuck it, might as well live closer to work", there's less driving. Hell, mass transit gets funded, Democrats are driven out of their mobster-politician roles as the working and professional classes return, schools get re-desegregated (this time, voluntarily), Chicago turns into a shining Tokyo on a hill, and you and him don't even need to consider buying a hybrid or e-car.
Its like the unification theory. It just requires the death of the Democratic party and the end to asinine compromises between scared whites (read: just about everybody who protested here) and love-to-spend-other-people's-money liberals.
Hello
|
I don't want to blow any holes in your theory or anything. Oh hell, yes I do, but only because it's silly.
I first moved to the suburbs because the city was too freaking crowded and dirty. But now, I live where I do because my employer is out here. And so is Sears. And Motorola. And Exelon (youu might remember it when it was just plain old Com Ed).
There's also the fact that I bought a new home for a little less than half what my brother paid for a falling-down "fixer-upper" in West Lakeview. Oh, and I have this thing called a driveway to park my car or for friends to park theirs.
You took a lot of shit for your theory because it has more holes in it than a wheel of Jarlsberg.
