[kosko]

(07-12-2017 08:55 AM)The Beast1 Wrote:  

Screw "walkable" cities.

Nothing is worse than being forced to live in a compact city. You get the privilege of going out to bars filled with cunty women to drink over priced sugar bombs, eat at disgusting over priced restaurants, sit on poorly cleaned buses/subways, pay obscene amounts of money for sub 500 sq ft housing (which you'll never be able to own outright), and having to listen to annoying neighbors up, down, left, and right making noise at all hours of the day.

But don't let this get in the way of the off chance you might get laid, because pussy > quality of life, family building, and making a lasting legacy.

Agian, not everything has to be NYC on roids. You don't have to equate a walking city with NYC piss, noise, and apartment prices. You can have a walkable town that only has 100K people, and lots of stuff to do with lots of room. What makes a place that is walkable is how it buildings and roads are constructed.

For example, almost all of North New Jersey is made up of walkable towns and cities. Now, none have the scenic and cultured vibes of Europe, but they are America's closest comparison to European style towns.

How where you live is constructed is directly correlated to how you achieve the ideal of raising a family and all that.

Women + Obesity
How did the USA become the fattest nation on earth? When it bent over to the Automobile and ripped up its towns and cities to build cookie-cutter suburbs, in just under a generation, everyone turned into fatties. This also impacts the abundance and quality of women -- who -- you would eventually try to marry. The USA is full of fatties while the few thin ones get Thirsted over and have their egos go into space.

Economy + Community
Cheap subsidies that chased fossil fuels and other non-sense hastened the move towards de-coupling of the economy and the shift towards service and paper push work. Before the slave push to Oil, you had factories and plants close to cities and towns and men could live in a town and go work in a factory. There was less of a need for women to work once a certain level of development was achieved. Women could stay at the townhome nad raise kids close by, take the kids by stroller to get groceries, your community was compact and safe, and you can have you kids play baseball in the streets while the neighbours watched. Also, again with subsidies, you would run away from "sprawl life" if you actually had to pay the true costs of it. In Europe there are fewer subsidies and the reality that space, and fuel costs a fuck tonne of money and only the wealthy take on that lifestyle in many cases. If you actually had to pay what it costs in the true sense to drive and water your large lawn you would re-think your choices almost overnight. So, imagine your rose coloured expansive ranch just outside of Dallas and have to roll into the gas station each week to pump in $10.00/Gallon gas.. does not sound so romantic now does it? If Americans had to pay the true costs, I tell you, overnight people would revolt.

^ American's somehow ran back to menial bycycles when oil was no longer easy to get.

Quality of Life
American work the most in the developed world and waste away years in total in Automobiles to go push papers to afford the debt on their chipboard suburban homes. American salve for chipboard homes they only spend an average of 5 awake hours in each day - pathetic.

American's who favour sprawl don't know any better. If you live in flyover country, your roads are empty since nobody lives in your city anymore. If you reside in a dynamic and growing city, you have to deal with traffic, noise, and BS like any other city person.

Of course, there is still the notion of choice. Not everyone wants to live in NYC; not everyone wants to live in City, not everyone wants to live in town, etc. The irony is Europe provides many more options for this. Many people in Europe live in very small townships that are still walkable and dense. These townships are connected by train or are a short trip from bigger cities so there is no isolation and the townships economy can function as being a cog within a larger regional economy. If someone wants open space they can have their little tract of land/farm and live it out in peace, nothing wrong with that. We have that option here, but so few take on that life choice because your economic options are more limited in small towns.

[The Beast1]

Sorry Kosko, but trying to emulate European lifestyles and city planning is a massive mistake. Europe is in terminal decline as it has been run by childless leaders who view children as a pox to be made immensely more expensive. Between negative interest rates and massive importation of 3rd world trash, there's a reason America is an empire and Europe is her vassal states.

Whether Europeans want to admit it or not is a moot point. When America says jump, Europe asks how high.

Women and Obesity:
I don't know where you're getting these ideas, but automobile use skyrocketed in the 50s, 60s, and 70s. No one was walking like you think they were then. Obesity became a problem in the 80s driven by processed grains and a lying medical establishment.

Economy+Community
Europeans pay as much as they do for fuel because they decided that fuel costs should pay for roads and public transit. European public transit is just as gross and slow as public transit in places like NYC and especially Boston. Anyone of means owns a car and has a similar disdain for public transit and public healthcare which to me is telling.

My dog would never sit on the seats on either a bus or train in Europe. You want to find out why? Take your hand and pat the seats gently for 15 seconds. Look at your hand. 'Nough said.

Secondly, America has massive oil resources in comparison to Europe. You pull it out of the ground and boil it in your backyard, i'd expect it to be affordable too. Europe doesn"t have that luxury.

I absolutely don't see how urban sprawl vs compact cities were a cause for women leaving home to work. Urban sprawl was an answer to the increasing importation of minorities by ruthless land developers breaking up traditional white neighborhoods with block busting methods.

If you want the true cause for urban sprawl , you can thank the desegregation of the 60s for that. I have absolutely no desire to live in a multicultural neighborhood.

Quality of Life:
I was far more miserable being forced into a crowded train car in London than I am sitting in traffic in my air conditioned 80s luxury car here in LA. Here's a curious thing, owning a cool and fun car as a daily driver means you have fun every time you drive. Commuting via car is always better than sitting on a train. Like I said earlier, gently pat the seats on any train the next time you're in one.

The oil crisis of the 70s was primarily caused by OPEC being fools and non OPEC countries being lazy because oil was infinitely cheaper coming from 3rd world arab countries (and to a lesser extent the whole Bretton Woods agreement). Thanks to Arabs being idiots, they lost their monopoly to domestic production and other countries ramping up their own exports. We will never see another oil crisis again as we have way too much competition for that to occur. Peak oil never existed.

In closing, I find it incredible that Europeans as a whole have been duped into living substandard western lifestyles piled on top of one another as their elites live lifestyles that Americans have been accustomed to for decades. America's spirit of manifest destiny was founded on the sheer basis that having room to breathe and spread around is the pathway to happiness.

It's also telling that there's a faction within America trying to hoist that same substandard lifestyle onto Americans in an effort to drive down the cost of living. Thankfully, the majority aren't having it except millenials and gen-xers who have an allergic reaction to living like adults and not college kids.

What America lacks in charm, we gain in better lifestyles, affordable housing, and an easier means of bootstrapping ourselves to better living. And even then, European charm is a thin veneer that's easily rubbed off when the reality of lower standards of living finally hit.

This isn't really an issue when your goals in life are hitting the bars, getting laid, and generally screwing around which most of Europe seems content on doing for the foreseeable future.

[LAKings]

I absolutely cannot stand sprawl. I also love living car free. I've only owned a car in 1 place that I've lived. And yeah...if you are after girls and gaming, these spread out cities are not good at all. Give me dense compact cities with great public transit.

[The Catalyst]

(07-12-2017 08:55 AM)The Beast1 Wrote:  

Screw "walkable" cities.

Nothing is worse than being forced to live in a compact city. You get the privilege of going out to bars filled with cunty women to drink over priced sugar bombs, eat at disgusting over priced restaurants, sit on poorly cleaned buses/subways, pay obscene amounts of money for sub 500 sq ft housing (which you'll never be able to own outright), and having to listen to annoying neighbors up, down, left, and right making noise at all hours of the day.

But don't let this get in the way of the off chance you might get laid, because pussy > quality of life, family building, and making a lasting legacy.

What about being forced to drive when you'd rather have easy public transport take you around? Cars are such a big headache to me.

At the moment I live in sprawl so I wouldn't know but surely any reasonable apartment would have decent soundproofing?

[The Beast1]

(07-12-2017 05:45 PM)The Catalyst Wrote:  

(07-12-2017 08:55 AM)The Beast1 Wrote:  

Screw "walkable" cities.

Nothing is worse than being forced to live in a compact city. You get the privilege of going out to bars filled with cunty women to drink over priced sugar bombs, eat at disgusting over priced restaurants, sit on poorly cleaned buses/subways, pay obscene amounts of money for sub 500 sq ft housing (which you'll never be able to own outright), and having to listen to annoying neighbors up, down, left, and right making noise at all hours of the day.

But don't let this get in the way of the off chance you might get laid, because pussy > quality of life, family building, and making a lasting legacy.

What about being forced to drive when you'd rather have easy public transport take you around? Cars are such a big headache to me.

At the moment I live in sprawl so I wouldn't know but surely any reasonable apartment would have decent soundproofing?

I mean hey if you want to ride around in a pool of festering human petri dishes that public transit is, then do it up. I used to feel the same way about driving until I commuted via public transit for a good five six years. After two it stopped being enjoyable and became an adventure in painful drudgery.

Try my trick, pat a seat on a public bus or train sometime. They're disgusting.

Either way, 1 hour of traffic sitting in this (my car's interior):


Beats 15 minutes of this any day :


As for noise, you get used to it. Most city apartments have poor sound insulation unless you are paying the price for it. White noise makers and background music help.

[LAKings]

(07-12-2017 05:45 PM)The Catalyst Wrote:  

(07-12-2017 08:55 AM)The Beast1 Wrote:  

Screw "walkable" cities.

Nothing is worse than being forced to live in a compact city. You get the privilege of going out to bars filled with cunty women to drink over priced sugar bombs, eat at disgusting over priced restaurants, sit on poorly cleaned buses/subways, pay obscene amounts of money for sub 500 sq ft housing (which you'll never be able to own outright), and having to listen to annoying neighbors up, down, left, and right making noise at all hours of the day.

But don't let this get in the way of the off chance you might get laid, because pussy > quality of life, family building, and making a lasting legacy.

What about being forced to drive when you'd rather have easy public transport take you around? Cars are such a big headache to me.

At the moment I live in sprawl so I wouldn't know but surely any reasonable apartment would have decent soundproofing?

For me it's not so much about girls, I mean obviously that's a factor in sprawl sucking. I've just never liked driving. Even when I visit these sprawled out cities I don't get a rental. Was in Charlotte last month and am in Memphis now. Just get a hotel/Airbnb in one of the walkable areas and Uber around or whatever. Really don't like driving and I'll avoid it whenever possible.

Give me a subway anyday.

[PhDre]

Some good posts by Kosko and The Beast.
In the end, we all have a different definition of a liveable city.
The main problem for me is that, at least over here in Europe, politicians want to force the plebs into high density, high rise, super low surface living.

In Flanders (North of Belgium) for instance, politicians have plans for the future to prohibit living in free standing houses (except for themselves and their rich friends of course). Also, some would like to enforce a minimum density of 5000 housing units/km2 and a minimum of 8-10 building layers (again, except for the villages in which they will live).

And of course, "educated" people under 40 celebrate this as an intelligent choice because "there are simply too many people on this planet and we are destroying open space". They never bothered to check the inhabitable surface of the earth and they conveniently ignore where this population explosion comes from. A more accurate and honest statement would be: "There are simply too many muslim rapefugees and gimmigrants to fit into Western Europe if we don't start living smaller."

(07-12-2017 03:50 PM)The Beast1 Wrote:  

Europe is in terminal decline as it has been run by childless leaders who view children as a pox to be made immensely more expensive. Between negative interest rates and massive importation of 3rd world trash, ...

Sad but true, this seems to be their ultimate goal. If they could get away with it, they would simply sterilize everyone (or rather all non-muslims) and be done with it.

(07-12-2017 05:45 PM)The Catalyst Wrote:  

At the moment I live in sprawl so I wouldn't know but surely any reasonable apartment would have decent soundproofing?

No matter what architects or real estate agents try to sell you, soundproofing in European apartments does not exist. Maybe it does in super high end residences aimed at the rich, but there is zero soundproofing in apartments that rent for less than a median monthly income.

(07-12-2017 03:50 PM)The Beast1 Wrote:  

Europeans pay as much as they do for fuel because they decided that fuel costs should pay for roads and public transit. European public transit is just as gross and slow as public transit in places like NYC and especially Boston. Anyone of means owns a car and has a similar disdain for public transit ...

True again, public transport is mainly funded by taxes on fuel and car ownership and is not a self-sustaining service. Also, while I think that public transport works great for travel within a city center or between two large city centers, it is true that it is painfully slow for anything else like reaching the suburbs or the countryside (if that is even possible).

[infowarrior1]

A significant factor in all this is the availability of cheap energy. Once that goes away then its bye bye suburbia.

[infowarrior1]

@TheBeast1
What matters is the net energy gain from fossil fuels. Which appears to be decreasing over time. Look at oil prices. Beforehand having below $50 a barrel was the norm yet now its considered quite low. So even if oil hasn't run out the energy return on investment is getting worse.
Unless innovation lowers energy costs fossil fuels don't seem viable long-term.

[Nascimento]

I like that I'm seeing different viewpoints here and it's not just a hit on one and a biased preference for the other.

[The Beast1]

(07-13-2017 04:40 AM)infowarrior1 Wrote:  

@TheBeast1
What matters is the net energy gain from fossil fuels. Which appears to be decreasing over time. Look at oil prices. Beforehand having below $50 a barrel was the norm yet now its considered quite low. So even if oil hasn't run out the energy return on investment is getting worse.
Unless innovation lowers energy costs fossil fuels don't seem viable long-term.

IW, I don't understand your post at all. Do you have more readings and info to bolster this point further? This is the first time i've seen it. A barrel of oil in 1980 has the same energy capacity as a barrel of oil today (as attested by matching the MPG in my 30 year old car past to present).

The price of a barrel of oil has more funny financial volatility in it than its actual cost of production. We can thank COMEX for that.

Secondly, we already have cheap energy in the form of nuclear power. Why we continue to try to play the pipe dream of wind and solar power beats me. Nuclear will always win out every single time for energy creation.

The time of compact cities caused by low energy sources is done and gone.

[911]

Good points Beast, just a few quibbles like this one here:

(07-12-2017 03:50 PM)The Beast1 Wrote:  

Sorry Kosko, but trying to emulate European lifestyles and city planning is a massive mistake. Europe is in terminal decline as it has been run by childless leaders who view children as a pox to be made immensely more expensive. Between negative interest rates and massive importation of 3rd world trash, there's a reason America is an empire and Europe is her vassal states.

Whether Europeans want to admit it or not is a moot point. When America says jump, Europe asks how high.

it's not America vs Europe, it's the oligarchs that run both places vs the great majority of people there. Americans are actually more heavily exploited, as the majority of US taxes go towards the military-industrial-surveillance complex. Most Europeans get better bang for their tax dollars, though they still get raped by the private fractional reserve system, run by the same people.

I agree that there is no direct subsidy to the oil industry, unless you count the entire American military apparatus as a subsidy for oil.

Quote:

I absolutely don't see how urban sprawl vs compact cities were a cause for women leaving home to work. Urban sprawl was an answer to the increasing importation of minorities by ruthless land developers breaking up traditional white neighborhoods with block busting methods.

If you want the true cause for urban sprawl , you can thank the desegregation of the 60s for that. I have absolutely no desire to live in a multicultural neighborhood.

E Michael Jones has done a remarkably good job analyzing this in his book titled "The Slaughter of Cities":

[The Beast1]

(07-13-2017 12:50 PM)911 Wrote:  

Good points Beast, just a few quibbles like this one here:

(07-12-2017 03:50 PM)The Beast1 Wrote:  

Sorry Kosko, but trying to emulate European lifestyles and city planning is a massive mistake. Europe is in terminal decline as it has been run by childless leaders who view children as a pox to be made immensely more expensive. Between negative interest rates and massive importation of 3rd world trash, there's a reason America is an empire and Europe is her vassal states.

Whether Europeans want to admit it or not is a moot point. When America says jump, Europe asks how high.

it's not America vs Europe, it's the oligarchs that run both places vs the great majority of people there. Americans are actually more heavily exploited, as the majority of US taxes go towards the military-industrial-surveillance complex. Most Europeans get better bang for their tax dollars, though they still get raped by the private fractional reserve system, run by the same people.

I agree that there is no direct subsidy to the oil industry, unless you count the entire American military apparatus as a subsidy for oil.

To wit I say the following good sir:

Americans subsidize both European defense via NATO and European healthcare. If Europeans were forced to pay for their own defense and at market prices for healthcare they would be far poorer and more angry at their tax costs.



and this fun article which describes the unfair pricing practices of foreign countries arbitrarily setting the costs of medicine and medical devices against American pharmaceutical companies and device manufacturers. We don't have such rules in the US and the companies make up the loss here.

http://www.ibtimes.com/how-us-subsidizes...pe-2112662

Quote:

In Europe, drug prices are set by governments, not by pharmaceutical companies the way they are in the U.S. On average, the difference between the price of one drug in the U.S. and the same drug in France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the U.K. was 50 percent, an analysis by the consulting firm McKinsey has found.

European countries are for the most part freeloaders who have been feasting off of American wealth for decades. Sadly, they're all going to learn that there isn't such thing as a free lunch.

[911]

I think the actual size of the US military-industrial-security complex is significantly bigger than reported, it's probably closer to 10% of US GDP than 4%. Every few years, the Pentagon claims it somehow can't account for missing trillions, that's because the black budget is well, hidden.

European countries aren't freeloaders, countries like France or the UK can defend themselves. The question is, against whom? Who is going to invade Europe? You think Russia is? The Soviet Union was propped up for decades to maintain Europe in a state of fear, big military budgets and feed the war achine in Korea, Vietnam and other proxy wars. They should be now reaping peace dividends. Germany doesn't have any colonies and spends little on defense, they can focus on building great products that the rest of world craves.

The Russian crisis is pure synthetic hype. Russia got divorce raped by Ukraine, they finally took back Crimea and went into the Donbass to protect their minorities there. They should settle this among themselves, and probably would have settled it if it weren't for the puppet regime set up by the Soros color revolution there.

Finally on healthcare, most Europeans have better diets (though the gap is narrowing), with more healthy lifestyles, balanced diets, wine, commuting by foot etc. This takes care of half the battle, you don't have too many pre-diabetic kids there. And kudos to their governments for not getting raped by Big Pharma as bad as Americans do.

[puckerman]

(07-12-2017 08:55 AM)The Beast1 Wrote:  

Screw "walkable" cities.

Nothing is worse than being forced to live in a compact city. You get the privilege of going out to bars filled with cunty women to drink over priced sugar bombs, eat at disgusting over priced restaurants, sit on poorly cleaned buses/subways, pay obscene amounts of money for sub 500 sq ft housing (which you'll never be able to own outright), and having to listen to annoying neighbors up, down, left, and right making noise at all hours of the day.

But don't let this get in the way of the off chance you might get laid, because pussy > quality of life, family building, and making a lasting legacy.

I have never bought into this idiotic idea that car-friendly and walkable are in conflict. I grew up in a small town in America. In small towns, you have both--they are friendly to pedestrians and cars.

I see urban sprawl as just putting a bunch of small towns together.

Finally, I didn't get into game so I could fuck bar trash. I got into game so I could meet quality women. You meet quality women at meetups, events promoted on Facebook, acting glasses, or other places where I can meet people and have fun.

[PhDre]

(07-13-2017 05:07 PM)The Beast1 Wrote:  

To wit I say the following good sir:

Americans subsidize both European defense via NATO and European healthcare. If Europeans were forced to pay for their own defense and at market prices for healthcare they would be far poorer and more angry at their tax costs.

and this fun article which describes the unfair pricing practices of foreign countries arbitrarily setting the costs of medicine and medical devices against American pharmaceutical companies and device manufacturers. We don't have such rules in the US and the companies make up the loss here.

http://www.ibtimes.com/how-us-subsidizes...pe-2112662

Quote:

In Europe, drug prices are set by governments, not by pharmaceutical companies the way they are in the U.S. On average, the difference between the price of one drug in the U.S. and the same drug in France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the U.K. was 50 percent, an analysis by the consulting firm McKinsey has found.

European countries are for the most part freeloaders who have been feasting off of American wealth for decades. Sadly, they're all going to learn that there isn't such thing as a free lunch.

I agree with 911 on this topic.

Why would Europe invest massive sums in defense? To protect us from the Russians?
The US wants Europe to invest more in defense mainly to enrich the American military-industrial complex.
I'm not saying that we should not have armed forces.
But Europe doesn't need more nuclear weapons, aircraft carriers, tanks and airfighters; rather it needs more SWAT teams, border control, vetting of immigrants, screening and surveillance of muslims, armed forces at public places,...

The only reason the US army has to be such a formidable force is because it is the globalist law enforcement arm.

As for the medicine prices. In Europe every single taxpayer is forced to pay for the healthcare of others. When you force people to pay (basically giving pharma companies an insurance that - once a medicine is approved - there will be a market for the product and they will receive their money), it is only natural that you impose a limit on the cost.

Also, pharma companies always claim that medicines need to be this expensive because of the billions in development costs that need to be recovered. Conveniently, they forget to add that a significant part of this cost seems to be an artificial barrier to entry.

[The Beast1]

You guys really don't get it do you? You've offered nothing to counter my points other than the same trite that's been mentioned and countered before.

This is how the world really works. If America wasn't around telling Europe what to do, European countries would be boot licking some other super power, most likely Russia, China, or if the muslims get their way Saudi Arabia or Turkey. They're weak, cucked, and blow easily in whatever direction the wind tells them to blow.

Strongmen are who rule the world. It's how it has always been and yes as much as I enjoy Russia and it's strong anti-globalist attitude, if push came to shove Russia would be the one telling Europe what to do and steam rolling their agenda all through out western Europe. Would the Europeans stand for it? Probably not, but what good is being mad about something if you don't have a fist to stand up for yourself?

I'll take globalist world police America over Russia, China, or some sand pit mongrels any day and the majority of Europeans if push came to shove would as well.

The only country in Europe able to sufficiently defend itself is the UK. If the migrant invasion thread and the past elections are of any note, there won't be a France and Germany in a decade nor do their citizens have any desire to right the course of their apathy.

Secondly, single payer healthcare is only feasible if you're telling device and drug companies how much to spend. I'm sorry, but the cost of developing these drugs isn't practical when some country demands you sell your product for a loss. What happens when those drug and device companies says, "No, we're not going to sell these drugs to you at that price" and walk away leaving said country's healthcare system without? How are those citizens going to feel when they can't get said drugs or procedures done or worse, the cost sky rockets and then has to be rationed out?

Or the flipside, America starts telling the same companies how much medicare is going to pay for those drugs and procedures. Watch how quickly those socialized services prices go up. It's already happening in the UK.

Between negative interests rates, welfare leaching rapefugees, and an aging childless population you guys seriously think these systems are capable of lasting?

The era of free lunches for socialized healthcare is quickly coming to an end and Europe is going to realize that it's fat cat freeloading socialized lifestyle is unsustainable. They bit the hand that fed them (America) and American citizens have had enough.

If we judge European culture by the fruits it has borne, we get childless adults, atheism, rampant sexual degeneracy, and a desire to submit to a foreign religion. There is nothing redeeming about western European culture (except maybe the UK, God Bless the Queen and Brexit) and none of it should be emulated. At best, it's a cautionary tale about what NOT to do if you wish to survive.

[Laner]

^^^

Fucken rights.

A lot of good those defense budgets do when they cant even stop an invading army on rubber dingys and cruise ships staffed by soy boys and barren feminists.

[PhDre]

^ No Beast, I don't get it.

So Europeans are cowards for not stopping the islamic immigration that is forced upon them by their leaders and the US? What are American citizens doing to stop the Mexican invasion or bullshit like Black Lives Matter? Having lived in the UK, you know very well that it is impossible to step up against this agenda without losing your job/becoming the target of antifa mobs/getting prosecuted...

And what about sexual degeneracy, atheism and childless adults? Those things are just as common in the US as they are over here. I would even say that the feminist/transgender/100000 different gender bullshit originated in the US.

I agree with you that the US has many advantages over Europe: far lower population density, larger surface area, abundant natural resources, 2nd amendment, lower taxes, far from islam, physically isolated ...

However, to claim that the US is a superpower and Europe not because Europeans are lazy adulterous cowards is a bit far fetched. I think the reason is rather the discrepancy in natural resources.

As for the pharma sector, where you continue to claim that Europeans are freeloading on the back of US citizens: are you aware that 4 of the 6 biggest pharma companies worldwide are European?

So while I agree with you that the US should definitely not try to emulate Europe, I don't agree with your motivation.

Anyway, maybe it's best to go back to the original topic and start discussing urban planning again.

[The Beast1]

(07-14-2017 12:51 PM)PhDre Wrote:  

^ No Beast, I don't get it.

So Europeans are cowards for not stopping the islamic immigration that is forced upon them by their leaders and the US? What are American citizens doing to stop the Mexican invasion or bullshit like Black Lives Matter? Having lived in the UK, you know very well that it is impossible to step up against this agenda without losing your job/becoming the target of antifa mobs/getting prosecuted...

The Antifa threat is overblown. I proudly wore my MAGA hat around London, as well as pronouncing who I voted for in the past election at work(along with my glorious bet winnings).

America voted in Trump who has been whipping the conservatives into what they need to be. Had that not occurred, I wouldn't be making this comment, but America cared about where it was going and subsequently voted in someone to fix the problem.

The English did the same thing with Brexit albeit by a narrow margin. Regardless, they care where they are heading and as such have a brighter future for themselves.

The same cannot be said for the French, Germans, and pretty much the entire EU with the exception of the eastern european countries.

(07-14-2017 12:51 PM)PhDre Wrote:  

And what about sexual degeneracy, atheism and childless adults? Those things are just as common in the US as they are over here. I would even say that the feminist/transgender/100000 different gender bullshit originated in the US.

Get out of the coastal cities and you'll see a much different America where people go to church, start families, and work real jobs. The heartland is what keeps America on its straight and steady path.

(07-14-2017 12:51 PM)PhDre Wrote:  

I agree with you that the US has many advantages over Europe: far lower population density, larger surface area, abundant natural resources, 2nd amendment, lower taxes, far from islam, physically isolated ...

However, to claim that the US is a superpower and Europe not because Europeans are lazy adulterous cowards is a bit far fetched. I think the reason is rather the discrepancy in natural resources.

Maybe if those same European countries paid into their fair share of their defense budgets and defended their borders we can take such a claim seriously. Until then, the three world super powers as of today are America, Russia, and China.

(07-14-2017 12:51 PM)PhDre Wrote:  

As for the pharma sector, where you continue to claim that Europeans are freeloading on the back of US citizens: are you aware that 4 of the 6 biggest pharma companies worldwide are European?

Read the links I have posted.

Again, America leads the world in medical research. Pharmaceutical company HQ locations do not matter in the slightest. Read: http://www.scimagojr.com/countryrank.php?area=2700

This Quora discussion also covers the question in larger depth with proper citations:
https://www.quora.com/What-countries-hav...rs?share=1

(07-14-2017 12:51 PM)PhDre Wrote:  

So while I agree with you that the US should definitely not try to emulate Europe, I don't agree with your motivation.

Anyway, maybe it's best to go back to the original topic and start discussing urban planning again.

Agreed, Europeans are lazy socialist freeloaders whose lifestyles have been given to them by the gracious gifts of American capitalism and citizens. As such we shouldn't try to emulate their lifestyles and city planning if America wishes to continue to be a world leader and not some sycophant to another world power.

[Naughty By Nature]

Another amazing perk about walkable cities is that you get to take the car out of the equation.

Cars are not only a massive rip-off ($6,000/year among the cost of the actual car, gas, insurance, and maintenance) but they're a huge liability (if you get into a crash or your car gets keyed...as matter of fact, my mediocre Hyundai got badly keyed twice within 8 months of living in phony ass Los Mangeles aka The LAnd of Snakes).

In a walkable city, you take public transit for a measly $1,000/year...or even $0 if you live in the heart of downtown.

[Naughty By Nature]

(07-10-2017 12:14 AM)Darkwing Buck Wrote:  

I've seriously got to move to a city by 2019. Like no joke. A real city with a downtown, dense urban center, walkability, and public transportation.

Looks like Chicago and Philadelphia are the only affordable options. NY being an option but pricey. Boston also could be an option but is full of white liberal feminists and SJWs from what I understand.

Hate urban sprawl and suburbs and really don't understand the people who like em. Especially for game and a player lifestyle.

Bro, you've gotta move within the next year, lol. Get the krap out of the LAnd of Snakes!

I've been in Philly for a couple weeks. Good city. Not Chicago or NYC, though. Still a clear upgrade over Los Mangeles.

Boston is decent but it's similar to Philadelphia in terms of the people being a bit on the cold, unfriendly side. People in Chicago, however, tend to be very friendly.

Word. Urban sprawl and suburban-style cities are garbage for the single player, unless you live in a logistical hotspot, MAYBE (like Santa Monica for LA or Midtown/Buckhead for Atlanta).

[The Beast1]

(07-14-2017 01:57 PM)Naughty By Nature Wrote:  

Another amazing perk about walkable cities is that you get to take the car out of the equation.

Cars are not only a massive rip-off ($6,000/year among the cost of the actual car, gas, insurance, and maintenance) but they're a huge liability (if you get into a crash or your car gets keyed...as matter of fact, my mediocre Hyundai got badly keyed twice within 8 months of living in phony ass Los Mangeles aka The LAnd of Snakes).

In a walkable city, you take public transit for a measly $1,000/year...or even $0 if you live in the heart of downtown.

Spoken like someone who has never commuted via public transit for a serious amount of time. Trust me, two years of the MBTA in Boston and you'll be crying for that crappy beater. It was always faster to commute via car in Boston and even Philly.

The money you save on a car is always eaten up by more expensive rents and more expensive groceries. Trust me, I lived in a sick "players pad" in Boston and ended up having nothing to show for it other than a few notches. Not worth it!

[Naughty By Nature]

(04-18-2017 11:34 PM)kosko Wrote:  

New York is held up as an example because there are so many shitty cities in North America. In America there is really only 8 cities which are largely nice and designed well in its more compact parts.

NYC
New Orleans
San Fransico
Boston
Philly/Chicago (in some parts)
Savanah GA
Charleston, SC
Portland, ME

The rest of America is a shit hole. The only two caveats are Miami and Las Vegas which can give you a good high quality of life but you gotta drive and pick your spots well.

I know it constantly gets dumped on on this forum but I'm surprised you didn't include DC. It's the 7th most walkable city in America and has the 4th best public transit system in America.

I guess the downside would be that there isn't really a centralized downtown. Is it Georgetown? Capitol Hill? Dupont Circle? Columbia Heights? Foggy Booty? Arlington, VA?

[PapayaTapper]

NBN

We get it. You didn't like LA. Like really didnt like it. Like really really really really...we get it.

Do you know any other tunes?