Comments on: Random Observations on Jindal, GREEN METROPOLIS etc.

By: Anymouse

Anymouse — Sat, 12 May 2012 20:32:50 +0000

Another good post. No part of the US has escaped those kinds of social and political corruptions.

By: Raymond Takashi Swenson

Raymond Takashi Swenson — Wed, 09 May 2012 00:37:22 +0000

My wife and I live in the Tri-Cities in southeast Washington. The population in the four cities of Richland, Kennewick, Pasco and West Richland totals about 250,000. The economy here is driven by agriculture (grain, potatoes, fruit, and vineyards) and by the cleanup of the Plutonium production facility that made nuclear weapons material from WW II through the Cold War. My daughter and son-in-law live about 5 minutes drive from ourt house. Their house is 4 doors from the elementary school, a 5 minute walk to church, a half mile to the region’s shopping mall and most of its restaurants and cinemas, a mile to my son-in-law’s work, and a mile to their main doctor’s clinic. They clearly do not use undue resources.

As for Manhattan, my understanding is that their water, which comes from upstate via pipelines and aquaducts, is not metered due to its ancient distribution system. There is no incentive to conserve water. By contrast, out here my water bill during summer months is higher than my electric power bill.

The more fundamental question is, can people who are not stockbrokers even afford to live in major cities? Seattle real estate is so expensive that law firms in the city have a difficult time finding homes for their staff who are not attorneys. The lack of affordable housing close in forces the lower income employees to live an hour+ commute away. That time and the money is steals from them is a real social justice issue, though it is never acknowledged when more and more restrictions are imposed on development of new housing, which raises the value of the real property that richer people have been able to buy, while freezing ordinary people out of the housing market, not just buying, but even renting.

By: Anymouse

Anymouse — Fri, 04 May 2012 03:11:29 +0000

Excellent point.

By: Stephen P

Stephen P — Fri, 04 May 2012 01:47:26 +0000

It’s misleading to say that Manhattanites are more “eco-sound” merely because they have smaller living spaces and are less likely to own cars. Such a lifestyle is only possible because other places are growing their food and producing their goods: they don’t produce tangible things in the city, just marketing campaigns, software products, bank accounts and financial instruments, etc.

When we look out at factory farms and smaller towns stripped of their culture, we need to realize that they’re part of a whole system that can’t be separated from those apartment-dwelling, subway-driving Manhattanites.

By: Anymouse

Anymouse — Thu, 03 May 2012 21:55:37 +0000

“What I miss from the Porchers is a defense of southern life as it actually IS these days.”
Today it has sadly become liberal and degraded. Some of the greatest welfare dependencies are in the South.

There is no point in defending the present, if the present is the enemy of the good.

By: Peter Lawler

Peter Lawler — Thu, 03 May 2012 14:52:56 +0000

I live in a small town too–a failed southern milltown. I park right outside my house on a pretty unwalkable hill, I drive 15 miles to park right outside my office. There’s a lot good about small town life, but my rural life isn’t so eco-friendly. Remember that I’m relatively pro-Walmart, country music, evangelical, and (sort of) rodeo. What I miss from the Porchers is a defense of southern life as it actually IS
these days. I buy local across the board when I can, but that’s a lifestyle choice I can afford these days. I do agree with Scruton that we need to get rid of a lot of the ridiculous health regulations that keep people from growing their own stuff and distributing it locally if that’s what they want to do.

By: Tim Anderson

Tim Anderson — Thu, 03 May 2012 14:33:38 +0000

I live in a small to mid-sized town in southern Minnesota having moved from a city in Southwestern Virginia and must agree with much of what you say. The small town is a good place to live, but much of what made for the good of small town life has been disrupted by the changes of the last 50 years that what was once very good and local about small towns has been disrupted. The town is filled with people driving pickups and SUV’s and the conversation is filled with references to trips to Minneapolis and other small cities to make up for what is missing; especially among those who would rather live in the city, but are stuck with work or telecommute.

I must quibble with one statement however: “The city is also a very diverse, challenging, and fascinating place to walk, much more interesting that some farm field.”

As I rode my bike to work on Monday, I rode past a field newly moistened by rain and the smell and taste of the soil was only the first interesting thing that one might find by paying attention to such things. I would encourage you to spend a day searching a field and you would find that they are interesting and challenging places to be than you might at first glance think. They still have a way of connecting and rooting us in a visceral way to things that matter.

I too find Berry less than convincing, but there is something good about the small town that, though significantly eroded, is still of value. A walk in a corn field is still a good tonic for much that ails those of us who may have forgotten where our food still comes from, even if too much of it now goes to providing fuel for the SUV I drove today because I don’t ride my bike in the rain. You are probably correct that much of rural life is less eco-friendly, but that is at least in part due to what Berry criticizes.