Individualism - expensive?

[Imran Siddiqui]

What is this tosh about American city planning? Take, for example, Atlanta. Are you suggesting the people cram into a few city blocks, paying through the nose for a city flat, when the entire city is surrounded by oodles and oodles of uncleared, cheap land?



The reason there is sprawl is because it is cheaper to move out where it isn't built up rather than cram into a city flat.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Originally posted by Dracon II


What are the factors making such things cheaper? Increased competition? Production in the 3rd world? Cheaper materials? Improved production processes?

Good question. All of the above, I'd guess; gigantic economies of scale help, as does being able to outsource production to the cheapest labor markets in the world.

Another trend toward the increase in atomization is the shift in what constitutes "play," as a broad term. It seems to me, from rem,embering my own generation and now observing my daughters, that entertaining one's self is a decidedly less social experience now than it once was; my daughter and her friends seem to plug into her machines far more often that she seeks out real people. Admittedly, there are friends "in the machine" -- chatting, playing on-line games, etc. But it doesn't change the fact that for her, amusing herself (and even being social) now takes the form of spending lots of time physically alone. That didn't used to be true.

And that may in fact be someplace where atomization is expensive. The capital investment required for 12 people to play WoW, or even just chat, is far greater than the cost of of my childhood pals playing softball -- to say nothing of us just gathering under a streetlight to shoot the sh!t.

[DanS]

Originally posted by Smiley
Most trips by families are not done as a group; this is why many suburban or rural families wil have multiple cars.

I also find the 50 cent gas tax being sufficient to cover all externalities rather hard to believe.

Adam Smith has the citation for the article, if you're skeptical.

With regard to families, I don't think you can say "most trips" by families are not done as a group. You pulled that straight from your ass.

[Adam Smith]

From Ian Parry at RESOURCES FOR THE FUTURE and appearing in the American Economic Review any day now:

Under our central parameter values, the second-best optimal gasoline tax is $1.01/gal for the US* and
$1.34/gal for the UK. These values are moderately sensitive to alternative parameter assumptions. The
congestion externality is the largest component in both nations, and the higher optimal tax for the UK is
due mainly to a higher assumed value for marginal congestion cost. Revenue-raising needs, incorporated
in a “Ramsey” component, also play a significant role, as do accident externalities and local air pollution.

*AS: Current state + federal gas taxes are about 45 cents per gallon weighted average across the entire country.

http://www.rff.org/Documents/RFF-DP-02-12.pdf

Higher gasoline taxes are one way of raising the cost of driving so that people will be fully charged for the social and environmental costs of driving—and an increase in gasoline taxes of just over 50 cents a gallon could be justified on these grounds.

http://www.rff.org/rff/News/Features/loader.cfm?url=/commonspot/security/getfile.cfm&PageID=12736

edit: typos

[:) Smiley]

Originally posted by DanS
With regard to families, I don't think you can say "most trips" by families are not done as a group. You pulled that straight from your ass.

This requires explanation?

How many families do you know of where both parents work at the same place, and take their kids to work every day?

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by notyoueither
Think again. Many of these cities were laid out while horses were all the rage.

Are you saying that the roads were three lanes each way and there were massive suburban sprawl?

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by DanS
Even paying full cost on these things, most rural areas would be absurdly cheap. Those items aren't really that expensive, even if you charge full freight.

I guess what is "full cost" is up to debate. Like if you cut down trees to build a road, the full cost may be to plant sufficient trees to absorb the same amount of CO2.

[DanS]

I think you're conceding the point, since you're dickering about some trees, which are extremely marginal cost-wise.

City folks' conceptions of things sometimes are very strange...

[Odin]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger


I guess what is "full cost" is up to debate. Like if you cut down trees to build a road, the full cost may be to plant sufficient trees to absorb the same amount of CO2.