[arthurofbabylon]

I believe Americans are naive to the bad deal they're currently sitting with. It is the most materially wealthy place on earth, yet with terrible distribution – this is not a technical problem, it is a cultural problem.

My favorite example is to describe a suburb. A lot of people in the world do not know how dystopian an American suburb is: many residents do not know their neighbors, acquiring food requires driving a car or paying someone else to drive, there exists a strict separation from nature/outdoors, depression and other preventable illness rates are high, life expectancy in some regions is declining, there is no plaza/piazza/"downtown." And yet, there are all of these buildings with concrete and glass (and vinyl siding) and more, with plumbing and electricity and often natural gas. The suburb despite its immense resources is simply not subject to a design process and not well-implemented.

This is the deal that Americans unwittingly signed up for. It is not a very good deal, and if we were willing to more intelligently engage our political processes we could — as the article suggests — have a much more favorable arrangement. However, if Americans writ large remain ignorant to how good it could be, the healthy political engagement will not materialize.

So here is a contrasting perspective, shared in hopes of spurring some healthy negotiation from my fellow Americans -> Imagine walkable residential neighborhoods with cafes/restaurants/shops where neighbors interact and by interacting reduce premature mortality, education is not just free but comes with a humble stipend, more than half the population commutes via passive transit, retail businesses are allowed to operate at almost any size, there is a guaranteed basic income for anyone disabled or simply unlucky, neighbors share resources like food and tools, police are trained and police officer candidates are screened to prevent those with exceptionally low IQ's from entering the field, administrators go to prison for violating laws, traffic systems are routinely redesigned and upgraded for safety and efficiency... And if any of this sounds like a pipe dream then I urge the skeptics to travel – every example above has been successfully implemented somewhere, in Thailand or Switzerland or Japan etc.

Naivety is the common trait that currently holds America back from what it really quite easily could accomplish.

[joegibbs]

But who are you to decide whether suburban Americans are living the right kind of life? Surely if they wanted to they could move to an apartment in a dense inner-city area. It would be cheaper than living in a large house in the suburbs and save them from spending more on heating, maintenance and cars. It would save them time as well, because they could be located close to their office. Despite all these downsides they still prefer to buy large suburban houses, drive everywhere, not know their neighbours and so on. Perhaps they just like it that way.

[arthurofbabylon]

You — like other reactive commenters — missed the point. You are welcome to like suburbs, I don’t care. But you would be a fool to believe that the current state is optimal and that an awareness of better designs would not impact the prospects of fulfilling those better designs. (You’d also be a fool to believe American suburbs are anywhere near the best neighborhoods in the world on any metric.)

Don’t be distracted by the shiny suburbs — pay attention to the ideas contained within the broader comment.

[tptacek]

Police officers are screened in a way that intentionally prevents people with exceptionally low IQs from entering the field.

[arthurofbabylon]

It is the job given to low status men who cannot qualify for other jobs. Every society deals with its low status men in some form or another — in many US regions it is becoming a cop, in Russia it is being sent to war, historically it was being sent to the mines.

[tptacek]

No? It's significantly harder to become a police officer than a truck driver or a skilled tradesperson, and, in particular, in most departments there's an actual higher ed requirement.

[eth0up]

In Sarasota FL, if I remember correctly, since about 2009-ish, Police need either a two-year degree, or military service. Judging from my personal observations and encounters, more than a few had/have well deserved degrees. The prior Chief had a masters, I think from the FBI National Academy. Did a lot of good for the city, compared to what they had before. I know the criteria does vary wildly though, throughout the country. But in many places, one can find some seriously sharp officers, and a few mighty good ones here and there too. Things are a wee bit different a few miles south in Port Charlotte though.

Also, I was, for unknown reasons, under the impression tptacek had taken hiatus around here. Half glad I was mistaken.

[tptacek]

HALF?!

[eth0up]

Ja man. We had enough trouble with a small handful of HN monsters chewing up perfectly innocent threads. Now we have LLMs on the loose too. Soon mortals won't be able to leave a comment anywhere without risking limbs. Life is getting tough for lowbrows. Half is generous.

[hollerith]

Is that really true? It's not super high status, for sure, but many police departments in the US require every officer to have a bachelors degree. And the pay is higher than average.

[doc_ick]

I doubt it.

[doc_ick]

Source?

[glimshe]

I love suburbia.

I grew up in "walkable residential neighborhoods with cafes/restaurants/shops where neighbors interact" outside the US. Thank you, but no thank you. Crowded, nosy judgemental people, noisy and small properties with constant fights with neighbors.

You're projecting you personal tastes onto others and thinking everybody else is getting a bad deal.

[dqv]

So the stereotypes are true. My friend in elementary school told an amusing story about his friend, in a Swedish family, who moved from our nice suburb to a suburb in another state, one like the grandparent is describing. They didn't understand why there was such a vast difference between the two. It seemed obvious to me, but I guess it's not obvious to foreigners.

You ran right past the GP's statement too:

> yet with terrible distribution

applies to the quality of a suburb too. Obviously. You wouldn't catch me dead in a Texas suburb or Florida suburb.

[glimshe]

You can apply the same argument to wealthy dense neighborhoods in affluent areas full of designer coffee and organic produce vs dense neighborhoods in poor areas of a city with monthly food poisoning at local restaurants. Vast difference, go check Latin America for examples of terrible dense neighborhoods.

My argument is that not even nice dense neighborhoods are that nice compared to nice suburbia.

It's a matter of the person's life values and I believe the majority wouldn't necessarily pick the nice dense neighborhoods over nice suburbia. Also, I'd pick bad suburbia over bad inner cities.

[eudamoniac]

I'd pick the worst version of suburbia over the best downtown city in the world. I've lived in many of each. Suburbs came into existence for a reason! People like them! I've never been closer to ending it all than when I lived in a Seattle highrise surrounded by bodegas and "things to do".