MyDD :: Where There's A Will, There's An Obstacle

Where There's A Will, There's An Obstacle

by Charles Lemos, Tue May 19, 2009 at 02:04:17 AM EST

Matthew Yglesias has a beautiful takedown of the ever obstinate and frankly out-of-touch George Will who in his Newsweek column demonstrates that he remains living in the America of circa 1955. Mr. Will's chief complaint is that he can't stomach all this change that is afoot. He complains of "Washington's inundation of painfully earnest and pitilessly incessant talk about "remaking" this (health care, Detroit) and "transforming" that (the energy sector, the planet's temperature)." And he seems sadden that the Transportation Secretary, Ray LaHood, he of Peoria, wants to coax Americans away from their profligate driving habits.

What Mr. Will fails to realize that suburbia is proving the greatest misappropriation of economic resources in human history. They are simply unsustainable and America's future is an urban and denser one. While urban sprawl is a worldwide problem, American cities have been built primarily for the ease of vehicular traffic with livability for humans seemingly an afterthought. As James Howard Kunstler notes the United States has invested all of its post-World War II wealth in an infrastructure for daily life that has no future. It is the Secretary LaHood's credit that he sees that the writing is on the wall.

In this year's Mercer Consulting ranking of the world's best quality of life survey, seven American cities did make the top fifty (Honolulu, San Francisco, Boston, Portland, Washington DC, Chicago, New York and Seattle) but none cracked the twenty-five. Conversely six German cities made the top 30 and four Canadian cities made the top 25. Three Swiss cities made the top ten and a revitalized Vienna took top honors.

Mr. Will quotes President Lyndon Johnson's May 22, 1964 address to the graduates of the University of Michigan where he warned that American was in danger of being "buried under unbridled growth." A better word would have been paved and the fact remains that the planet's natural resources cannot sustain the heavy demands of suburbia. Americans have long had the largest sustainable footprint of any people on the planet. It stands 9.6 hectare per American. On a global scale, the average ecological footprint is 2.8 hectares, which is already more than what is sustainable, that being 1.9 hectares per person.

Tags: George Will, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood (all tags)

Permalink :: 2 Comments :: Post a Comment

Re: Where There's A Will, There's An Obstacle (none / 0)

Kunstler and this diary are right on target, except that the point about cities having "been built primarily for the ease of vehicular traffic with livability for humans seemingly an afterthought" applies almost exclusively to post-World War II development. Even in the suburbs founded before the war, compare the oldest parts of town with the areas built between 1960-1990: The older areas are denser, more walkable, built with mixed uses and housing types, and usually clustered around train stations.

The Congress for the New Urbanism, where I work, is in the forefront of the movement to replace sprawl with healthier, more sustainable forms of development. Our annual gathering this year begins in three weeks in Denver: CNU 17, Experiencing New Urbanism: The Convenient Remedy, June 10-14. There's no better place to learn the latest from the leaders of New Urbanism.

We as a country and a society must change our ways, painful as that is, and will be, or we doom ourselves to bloated obsolescence while other countries and regions overtake us. Come to Denver and see how this change is already under way.

After all, the last convention held in the Mile High City produced a pretty damn good result.

by Railfan on Tue May 19, 2009 at 01:01:18 PM EST

Re: Where There's A Will, There's An Obstacle (none / 0)

Livability is indeed something that hasn't been considered since car ownership became widespread.

There's only one word I'd quibble with in this article - in the quote "American cities have been built primarily for the ease of vehicular traffic" - the word EASE must be quite loosely interpreted.

Either cities were built with 'ease' of vehicular traffic in mind while assuming vehicular traffic would never be more prevalent than at the instant they did the building, OR cities were built to ensure 'the ability for vehicular traffic to get from one part of the greater area to another' without any deference to the word 'ease'.

I work near DC and live in central MD. I could live in northern VA and get an immediate 2.2% raise because VA income taxes are that much lower (although I get better exemptions)...

... but I will not put myself in a position where I have to drive somewhere by a certain time via PARKING LOT.

I'm not worldly, but the roads are crowded in northern VA within 3 hours either side of rush hour to a point I've seen nowhere else. The commute extends the work day by 50%.

If increases in population continue to outpace improvements and expansions of the roadways in the suburbs and exurbs, you will soon end up with a lot more support than you think.

Even if members of the general public don't concern themselves so much with carbon footprints or vehicular pollution and its effects... they will surely be happy to change lifestyles if these nightmarish commuting issues continue or worsen.

by RecoveringRepublican on Tue May 19, 2009 at 02:58:08 PM EST

You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.