# Why do liberals hate suburbs? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 31, 2013, 2:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-liberals-hate-suburbs/664965 "2013-07-31T02:31:40Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 18
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2013, 6:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-liberals-hate-suburbs/664965/341 "2013-08-07T18:54:13Z")
> [@Debaser](#): > > Maybe there is a better way of building a society than the one we have, which is based on things like cars and gasoline. But it’s hardly fair to describe it as a “problem”. It’s like the old joke about capitalism: It’s the worst system, except for all the others. I’m sure in your imagination you can come up with a better system where everyone jogs to work every morning, but that’s just not reality. I don’t need to use my imagination, I can look at Europe, where it is reality, and a better one than here. People drive there but they drive **less.** Residential densities are higher, neighborhoods more walkable, public-transportation options both practical and available. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2013, 9:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-liberals-hate-suburbs/664965/342 "2013-08-07T21:32:28Z")
> [@Lumpy](#): > > I’m reminded of Yevgeny Zamyatin’s dystopian novel _ **We** _, depicting an ultra-collectivist city-state in the far future. It had long ago been made a crime to live outside the “Green Wall”, and a tiny population of people in the wilderness had gone without fire to avoid detection for so long that they’d _re-evolved fur_. :eek: Watch your follicles, suburbanites! ---
**Author:** ![ralph124c](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/8797f3/32.png) [@ralph124c](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ralph124c)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2013, 10:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-liberals-hate-suburbs/664965/343 "2013-08-07T22:22:17Z")
Quote: \*\*That is not just an esthetic problem, it produces residential segregation by income. If every house in the neighborhood is more or less the same then it costs more or less the same, and only people whose income falls within a certain range will live there – the richer will not and the poorer cannot. I hope you can recognize that as a problem. \*\* So, it is a big problem when people are allowed to live where they want? Spoken like a true commissar. Lenin wold be proud! ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2013, 11:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-liberals-hate-suburbs/664965/344 "2013-08-07T23:28:06Z")
In any municipal unit there will be usually over half the residents who pay less than their “fair share”. You buy in the cheapest subdivision in the nicest school district and send your five kids to the public schools, you could be said to be a freeloader. Where does it end? How atomised do municipalities have to be before the affluent stop resenting people less affluent than they are getting a slice of “their” pie? Will they be satisfied only when all revenue comes from poll taxes? Not a rhetorical question. ---
**Author:** ![Yookeroo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/yookeroo/32/323_2.png) [@Yookeroo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Yookeroo)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2013, 12:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-liberals-hate-suburbs/664965/345 "2013-08-08T00:00:13Z")
> [@madmonk28](#): > > I find it odd that some people seem to think that cities are these oppressive planned societies And that this quality is what is appealing. Not the diversity. Not the access to culture, the museums, the live music, the dance clubs, the variety of food…It’s not the walkability or access to public transportation. It’s the controlled oppression that liberal city dwellers are lusting for! The mind boggles. > [@madmonk28](#): > > when it is the suburbs that have the reputation for stultifying conformity. Every few months someone starts a thread about how upset they are that someone has parked in front of their house, and it always leaves me scratching my head. Who cares? He parked there because he wanted to. And don’t forget homeowners associations. Talk about oppressive planned societies. ---
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2013, 12:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-liberals-hate-suburbs/664965/346 "2013-08-08T00:17:26Z")
> [@Alessan](#): > > Well, the Kibbutz movement in Israel is both left-wing and anti-urbanist. For all I’ve read it’s a dying movement – I would love living in one of them. But only as bachelor w/no kids. I don’t quite understand “communal child rearing.” ---
**Author:** ![Tamerlane](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tamerlane/32/7602_2.png) [@Tamerlane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tamerlane)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2013, 12:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-liberals-hate-suburbs/664965/347 "2013-08-08T00:37:26Z")
> [@Debaser](#): > > You won’t ever see all of those groups living in the same city or town. The same neighborhood? That’s crazy. It’s not common, but you do see something like this in a few neighborhoods in ultra-liberal and generally rather pricey Berkeley, CA. Not usually the very rich ( they do tend segregate a bit more heavily ), but poor - to upper-middle class and everything in between. A consequence of historically very strong rent control and some subsidized affordable housing, unusually combined with desirable properties/amenities. Does it work? Eh, IMHO it has its pluses and minuses. ---
**Author:** ![Shagnasty](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9dc877/32.png) [@Shagnasty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shagnasty)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2013, 12:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-liberals-hate-suburbs/664965/348 "2013-08-08T00:48:44Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > I don’t need to use my imagination, I can look at Europe, where it is reality, and a better one than here. People drive there but they drive **less.** Residential densities are higher, neighborhoods more walkable, public-transportation options both practical and available. Be careful when idealizing Western Europe as a whole. That is a common Progressive fantasy and mistake. The whole package also includes a few thousand years of people completely slaughtering each other for any reason or no reason followed by a few decent decades after WWII and then economic collapse again in the present day. I don’t know what countries will be able to pull out of it eventually but be careful who your role models are especially since consolidation in the form of the Eurozone and Euro currency helped the catastrophic failures spread much more quickly than they would have otherwise. It actually makes a much better counter-argument. ---
**Author:** ![even\_sven](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/dfb087/32.png) [@even\_sven](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/even_sven)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2013, 1:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-liberals-hate-suburbs/664965/349 "2013-08-08T01:13:24Z")
> [@Shagnasty](#): > > Be careful when idealizing Western Europe as a whole. That is a common Progressive fantasy and mistake. The whole package also includes a few thousand years of people completely slaughtering each other for any reason or no reason followed by a few decent decades after WWII and then economic collapse again in the present day. I don’t know what countries will be able to pull out of it eventually but be careful who your role models are especially since consolidation in the form of the Eurozone and Euro currency helped the catastrophic failures spread much more quickly than they would have otherwise. > > It actually makes a much better counter-argument. Ok, sure, yeah. But the bike lanes in Amsterdam are _great_. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2013, 1:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-liberals-hate-suburbs/664965/350 "2013-08-08T01:16:11Z")
> [@Shagnasty](#): > > Be careful when idealizing Western Europe as a whole. That is a common Progressive fantasy and mistake. The whole package also includes a few thousand years of people completely slaughtering each other for any reason or no reason followed by a few decent decades after WWII and then economic collapse again in the present day. I don’t know what countries will be able to pull out of it eventually but be careful who your role models are especially since consolidation in the form of the Eurozone and Euro currency helped the catastrophic failures spread much more quickly than they would have otherwise. > > It actually makes a much better counter-argument. [shrug] But their physical density and walkability and mass-transit systems have nothing to do with any of that. They result from the fact that Europe has a much longer history than the U.S. and most towns there were built before mass automobile ownership was available. In any case, what matters is not how they got that way, but that such a built environment appears to work better than ours in daily life. ---
**Author:** ![Balthisar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/balthisar/32/2825_2.png) [@Balthisar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Balthisar)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2013, 1:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-liberals-hate-suburbs/664965/351 "2013-08-08T01:19:43Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > George Bailey grew up better because he could walk everywhere in Bedford Falls. Bedford Falls wasn’t a city. It was a tiny town. Just like the small town where I grew up, that people deride as being a suburb. Just like my particular suburb (in Michigan) is currently. It (Beford Falls) is a horrible example in favor of cities, because it’s not a city. I guess now we have to rant about how small towns that are nowhere close to a major city suck the life out of everything. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2013, 1:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-liberals-hate-suburbs/664965/352 "2013-08-08T01:28:01Z")
> [@Balthisar](#): > > Bedford Falls wasn’t a city. It was a tiny town. Just like the small town where I grew up, that people deride as being a suburb. Just like my particular suburb (in Michigan) is currently. It (Beford Falls) is a horrible example in favor of cities, because it’s not a city. > > I guess now we have to rant about how small towns that are nowhere close to a major city suck the life out of everything. Exactly! Bedford Falls is the kind of **town** suburbia **killed!** See [post #154.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=16532395&highlight=clusterfuck#post16532395) Haven’t you ever driven through an old town like that and seen everything boarded up? I have. Of course, George Bailey still could have walked everywhere if he had grown up in New York City, as he apparently wished he had. But not if he grew up in Levittown. ---
**Author:** ![Shagnasty](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9dc877/32.png) [@Shagnasty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shagnasty)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2013, 1:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-liberals-hate-suburbs/664965/353 "2013-08-08T01:46:43Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Exactly! Bedford Falls is the kind of **town** suburbia **killed!** See [post #154.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=16532395&highlight=clusterfuck#post16532395) Haven’t you ever driven through an old town like that and seen everything boarded up? I have. Sure I have but I don’t see what that has to do with the subject at hand. Towns live and die just like everything else. My home town in Louisiana doesn’t exist in any recognizable form anymore because it was only created as a railroad and steamboat stop. Time marches on. Now it is a major natural gas producer which making it more valuable to the nation than it ever was before but the community has evolved and adapted to the changing circumstances. Here is another town that I know well because I lived there for ten years. [Holliston, MA](http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://media-cdn.tripadvisor.com/media/photo-s/01/73/bf/cf/holliston-ma.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.tripadvisor.com/Tourism-g41613-Holliston_Massachusetts-Vacations.html&h=337&w=550&sz=34&tbnid=H4qHNyc8oqAcIM:&tbnh=70&tbnw=115&zoom=1&usg=__-1rJezCEcWBrqh4tRYotYotstX4=&docid=xfAGx-F3EdoymM&sa=X&ei=HfYCUt2wEdWn4AOfjIDACQ&ved=0CDIQ9QEwAQ&dur=702) is a suburb of Boston (the pictures don’t do it justice because it is strikingly beautiful in that New England kind of way) yet it is also a colonial town and almost complete intact including Main Street. There are more 1700’s houses than you can shake a stick at and a couple from the 1600’s as well. There is no fast food in town other than a Subway off of a quaint office building and only a couple of gas stations and red lights. I live in a slightly larger town now just down the road and it is mostly the same. That is not what most people think of when they form mental stereotypes against ‘suburbia’ yet is closer to the norm around here than not. You can’t pretend to know everything about the entire U.S. just based on what you see in your immediate vicinity. You will fall prey to confirmation bias coupled by limited data. I have had the privilege to travel across much of the U.S. and the world. There are gorgeous and thriving towns thriving across many areas and they do not demonstrate the stereotypes that people are trying to fight against with a sledgehammer. There are also shit cities, suburbs, and towns sprinkled all over. Don’t ever think that applies to all or even most of them however. The people that don’t choose to live in cities aren’t all held hostage by the Hank Hill’s of the world. Progressive types and control freaks in general, I plead to you once and for all, drop the bigotry and the ill-founded assumptions and open your mind outside of your own little universe. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2013, 2:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-liberals-hate-suburbs/664965/354 "2013-08-08T02:15:56Z")
> [@Debaser](#): > > The petroleum is there. As long as it exists, and with it the capability to do so much for humanity, people are going to use it. That’s just reality. We could scrap every car in America tomorrow and it wouldn’t matter. China and India would make up for it in a couple years. I agree every accessible drop of petroleum in the Earth’s crust is destined to be pumped out and **used** sooner or later, but that does not mean it is destined to be **burnt.** We also use the stuff for plastics, fertilizers and medicines, you know. We should be saving it for all of that however we can. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2013, 2:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-liberals-hate-suburbs/664965/355 "2013-08-08T02:28:35Z")
[Paul Krugman writes:](http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/29/opinion/krugman-stranded-by-sprawl.html?hp&_r=0) > [@](#): > > Yet in one important respect booming Atlanta looks just like Detroit gone bust: both are places where the American dream seems to be dying, where the children of the poor have great difficulty climbing the economic ladder. In fact, upward social mobility — the extent to which children manage to achieve a higher socioeconomic status than their parents — is even lower in Atlanta than it is in Detroit. And it’s far lower in both cities than it is in, say, Boston or San Francisco, even though these cities have much slower growth than Atlanta. > > So what’s the matter with Atlanta? A new study suggests that the city may just be too spread out, so that job opportunities are literally out of reach for people stranded in the wrong neighborhoods. Sprawl may be killing Horatio Alger. > > The new study comes from the Equality of Opportunity Project, which is led by economists at Harvard and Berkeley. There have been many comparisons of social mobility across countries; all such studies find that these days America, which still thinks of itself as the land of opportunity, actually has more of an inherited class system than other advanced nations. The new project asks how social mobility varies across U.S. cities, and finds that it varies a lot. In San Francisco a child born into the bottom fifth of the income distribution has an 11 percent chance of making it into the top fifth, but in Atlanta the corresponding number is only 4 percent. > > When the researchers looked for factors that correlate with low or high social mobility, they found, perhaps surprisingly, little direct role for race, one obvious candidate. They did find a significant correlation with the existing level of inequality: “areas with a smaller middle class had lower rates of upward mobility.” This matches what we find in international comparisons, where relatively equal societies like Sweden have much higher mobility than highly unequal America. But they also found a significant negative correlation between residential segregation — different social classes living far apart — and the ability of the poor to rise. > > And in Atlanta poor and rich neighborhoods are far apart because, basically, everything is far apart; Atlanta is the Sultan of Sprawl, even more spread out than other major Sun Belt cities. This would make an effective public transportation system nearly impossible to operate even if politicians were willing to pay for it, which they aren’t. As a result, disadvantaged workers often find themselves stranded; there may be jobs available somewhere, but they literally can’t get there. ---
**Author:** ![Shagnasty](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9dc877/32.png) [@Shagnasty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shagnasty)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2013, 2:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-liberals-hate-suburbs/664965/356 "2013-08-08T02:43:57Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > I agree every accessible drop of petroleum in the Earth’s crust is destined to be pumped out and **used** sooner or later, but that does not mean it is destined to be **burnt.** We also use the stuff for plastics, fertilizers and medicines, you know. We should be saving it for all of that however we can. That is the problem and **Debaser** is correct in any realistic view of the world. You can’t save petroleum or byproducts like you can money in a bank account. It is a global commodity and any single metro areas are just a dust mite on a flea of the dog that represents the entire world. It will all be used until alternative energy sources become viable and there are none that are even close to ready for production on that scale yet (nuclear energy could have mitigated that somewhat but Progressives shit the bed on that one 40 ago so you can’t get those powerplants online fast enough either even if we started a full campaign today). You can build all the bike paths you want (I like them too) or flood the market with next generation of Prius’s and hope to God you see a 0.1 percent decrease in potential worldwide emissions over ten years but even that is not going to happen. The only hope on a worldwide scale to switch electric power plants and fleet vehicles over to some type natural gas power over the next 15 years. It has already started on a relatively small scale and is going to ramp up quickly. That won’t solve the problem completely but it is the best hope for mitigating it rather than feel-good curbside recycling bins and having citified U.S. yuppies trying to run everywhere while dressed in the newest apparel. The true problem is human overpopulation which happened a long time ago but people refused to believe it because they thought some technology would come along to nullify it yet that never happened. In fact, increasing lifespans have made several key problems including environmental and economic ones much worse. If you are truly Progressive and care about Mother Earth that much, it would be much more effective to limit future births than to try to change the habits of the entire existing human population. I have news for you though. Mother Earth has seen much worse and will recover just fine no matter what we do or don’t do. Everything in between is just about human lifestyle choices. ---
**Author:** ![dropzone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dropzone/32/7515_2.png) [@dropzone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dropzone)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2013, 2:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-liberals-hate-suburbs/664965/357 "2013-08-08T02:56:55Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Exactly! Bedford Falls is the kind of **town** suburbia **killed!** See [post #154.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=16532395&highlight=clusterfuck#post16532395) Haven’t you ever driven through an old town like that and seen everything boarded up? I have. What killed those towns was not suburbia, but technology, an increasing population, and young people who needed to find jobs and have some fun. Technology reduced the number of hired hands needed to run a farm. The farms consolidated because forty acres and a mule was an uneconomical agricultural model now. And you must remember that every last Bumfuck, Nebraska or New Hampshire began as a support center for the farms of the area. Fewer farms and farmers meant the Bluebird Diner couldn’t survive, but service went downhill after Juanita run off with that traveling man, anyway. Technology let Bob Smith handle more cows down at the feed lot with the same number of workers. Cars and trucks made the stables obsolete, so there went those jobs. Emmett didn’t need any help down at his Fix-It Shop because modern electronics last longer than the old tube technology he knew, and often can’t be repaired anyway. The old widget factory, which lasted as long as it did by taking contract work for the military in Dubya-Dubyas One and Two, could no longer compete, and the founder’s grandkids didn’t want to spend their lives in a foundry. Instead they moved, not to Suburbia but to the bright lights of the Big City. The wars and movies had a lot to do with young people abandoning Mayberry, too. They saw there was a whole 'nother world out there, and by 1918 there was a very popular song lamenting their migration from Podunk, “How 'Ya Gonna Keep 'Em Down on the Farm (After They’ve Seen Paree?).” Cities, chock full of factories and fun, killed Mayberry. Suburbia came later, long after the first tumbleweeds tumbled down Main St. Yes, there are parts of the city that are very nice to live in, and I know that some of the appeal of suburbs is that they are not like that ancient, Chinese curse, “May you live in interesting places.” 😉 There are many elements of the city that can be brought out here, and the governments of many suburbs are doing just that to enlarge the tax base and improve property values (another way to increase revenue) by making their existing downtowns more liveable. My own town offers substantial remodeling grants if you take over a moribund storefront. However, you have taken a romantic (and often unrealistic) vision of how things were and how they should be and turned it into how things MUST be. It ain’t gonna happen. And while we are playing Dueling TV and Movies, submitted for your approval is a little tale written by a man like you who regretted the changes the modern world made to small town life, but with, of course, an inescapable twist at the end: [A Stop at Willoughby.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Stop_at_Willoughby) ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2013, 2:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-liberals-hate-suburbs/664965/358 "2013-08-08T02:57:01Z")
That is some devastating Krugman, **BG**. Let’s see if the pro-sprawl set can come up with any riposte or if it will just be crickets (or changing the subject). ---
**Author:** ![even\_sven](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/dfb087/32.png) [@even\_sven](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/even_sven)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2013, 3:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-liberals-hate-suburbs/664965/359 "2013-08-08T03:08:30Z")
The earth has seen worse, but the earth doesn’t really care about much, does it? I think the worries here are about the adjustments humans will have to deal with. I do think it’s pretty funny that basic urban planning is apparently some assault on freedom, but telling people how many kids to have is totally reasonable. > [@Debaser](#): > > This is a terrible idea. All that would accomplish is spreading gangs to the suburbs. > > I know from experience. This literally happens when your idea is attempted. They have special schools in my area that used to ship troubled kids out of the city to live in the suburbs. The theory was that being around good kids would straighten them out. The opposite occurred. These gang member kids are automatically the coolest kids in the suburban schools and quickly bring violence and drugs with them. > > This is forced busing all over again. Just a terrible, awful idea. “Gangs,” eh? Gee, what is that whistling sound…? ---
**Author:** ![Shagnasty](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9dc877/32.png) [@Shagnasty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shagnasty)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2013, 3:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-liberals-hate-suburbs/664965/360 "2013-08-08T03:18:19Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > That is some devastating Krugman, **BG**. Let’s see if the pro-sprawl set can come up with any riposte or if it will just be crickets (or changing the subject). I’m sorry, what were we talking about again? Is this thread about Atlanta and Detroit now or is supposed to be universal? They are two completely different sets of issues and Detroit is a perfect example of why you don’t want too much governmental power centered among the city proper. The same article admits admits that Atlanta’s problems can’t be corrected by the types of totalitarian reform that you are suggesting. Let’s assume just for giggles that you do know what you are talking about. Can you break it down into a more unified plan for all metropolitan areas that will have a sum total of greater benefits than unintended negative consequences? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-liberals-hate-suburbs/664965.md?page=17) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-liberals-hate-suburbs/664965.md?page=19)