idk if this is like ayn rand, or her opposite
The entire population of Virginia could live in New York City, with a little elbow room.
The entire population of Colorado could live in New York City, with a decent amount of elbow room.
The five boroughs cover 305 square miles. Double that for the sake of comfort.
Americans want to sprawl across the country. Yet land would be managed better, and provide more for its people, if folks lived in cities. Urban areas with formidable public transportation, disincentivizing private ownership of vehicles. Not in an onerous European socialist fashion, but enough where owning a SUV could be challenging, but a single VW Jetta or Honda Civic is within the means of a middle class family. Maybe something where one doesn't own, nor lease, an automobile ensures cut-rate access to mass transportation.
All that unused land, old cities, suburban and exurb sprawl goes to seed. Better yet, bulldoze it for farmland to provide for the USA. People who insist on being iconoclasts, living in the boonies, oughtn't be penalized but should be self-sufficient, appreciating the necessary travel to nearby towns for provisions and such. It can be done, and one can live cheaply much like this guy.
IMHO John Wells, the guy in the article you didn't click and read, exemplifies the eschewing of rampant consumerist culture. He's a far cry from Daniel Suelo.
The biggest issue here are people drawing a parallel between this initiative and the Khmer Rouge. Rather than moving people out into the country, folks are being herded into cities. Citizens need to be incentivized, choosing for themselves, since the greater good is a "nice idea" in the USA.
More realistic is an approach towards ameliorating the tax situation in New Jersey. The Garden State is a weak, socialist state. There are plenty of benefits, but they have the stigma of being solely for poor people. Taxes are unnecessarily high, like Millburn having an average property tax rate of $20,000. Conservatively, Millburn has an income of $300 million a year (generous estimate, 19k population in less than 10 square miles) from property taxes alone. Millburn has 54 cops, a brace of mediocre public schools, and typical suburbia.
The issue at hand being the New Jersey concept of self-determination. From the tiniest village to a bustling metropolis like Newark, everyone needs to have their own cops, their own self-governance, town hall clerks, and so forth.
Take these areas, consolidate them under the auspices of counties which manage those services, and the towns remain in name only. Go ahead and celebrate your crappy high school teams, or local leagues with town rivalries, but having 565 town halls, police departments, and other services is strangling the state, driving people out because the state's becoming more unlivable. Insert joke about toxic waste, hypodermic needles at the shore, etc. Hardy har har.
Once that budget's done, look for pork, lop it off, fold it back into the treasury.
The entire population of Colorado could live in New York City, with a decent amount of elbow room.
The five boroughs cover 305 square miles. Double that for the sake of comfort.
Americans want to sprawl across the country. Yet land would be managed better, and provide more for its people, if folks lived in cities. Urban areas with formidable public transportation, disincentivizing private ownership of vehicles. Not in an onerous European socialist fashion, but enough where owning a SUV could be challenging, but a single VW Jetta or Honda Civic is within the means of a middle class family. Maybe something where one doesn't own, nor lease, an automobile ensures cut-rate access to mass transportation.
All that unused land, old cities, suburban and exurb sprawl goes to seed. Better yet, bulldoze it for farmland to provide for the USA. People who insist on being iconoclasts, living in the boonies, oughtn't be penalized but should be self-sufficient, appreciating the necessary travel to nearby towns for provisions and such. It can be done, and one can live cheaply much like this guy.
IMHO John Wells, the guy in the article you didn't click and read, exemplifies the eschewing of rampant consumerist culture. He's a far cry from Daniel Suelo.
The biggest issue here are people drawing a parallel between this initiative and the Khmer Rouge. Rather than moving people out into the country, folks are being herded into cities. Citizens need to be incentivized, choosing for themselves, since the greater good is a "nice idea" in the USA.
More realistic is an approach towards ameliorating the tax situation in New Jersey. The Garden State is a weak, socialist state. There are plenty of benefits, but they have the stigma of being solely for poor people. Taxes are unnecessarily high, like Millburn having an average property tax rate of $20,000. Conservatively, Millburn has an income of $300 million a year (generous estimate, 19k population in less than 10 square miles) from property taxes alone. Millburn has 54 cops, a brace of mediocre public schools, and typical suburbia.
The issue at hand being the New Jersey concept of self-determination. From the tiniest village to a bustling metropolis like Newark, everyone needs to have their own cops, their own self-governance, town hall clerks, and so forth.
Take these areas, consolidate them under the auspices of counties which manage those services, and the towns remain in name only. Go ahead and celebrate your crappy high school teams, or local leagues with town rivalries, but having 565 town halls, police departments, and other services is strangling the state, driving people out because the state's becoming more unlivable. Insert joke about toxic waste, hypodermic needles at the shore, etc. Hardy har har.
Once that budget's done, look for pork, lop it off, fold it back into the treasury.