Joel, While your example of the extreme does show the positives, you skipped many of the major problems there as well. I do like to think in extremes also; it helps to see both sides usually.
If everyone lived in your first scenario, everything would be great except for some major issues: 1) It would allow for amazing efficiency of getting around because walking or taking any public transit would be quick. But imagine trying to get 100,000 people around at 9am or 5pm in an extremely dense scenario! It just wouldn't happen. 2) Given how many people travel, even if just a few hundred miles for a short vacation or to visit family occasionally, most everyone will always want to own a car. Obviously even 20,000 cars would require some amazing parking system and take us vast amounts of space also. 3) Your scenario would make most everyone poor. Jobs like car sales-people, landscapers, and road workers, would shrink to almost nothing. Most other jobs, especially for small businesses, would be taken over by large ones. I imagine Walmart would buy a floor (or many) in this building and any small store would have little chance of competition when Walmart is closer and cheaper. [Maybe #3 is a good thing if it made population lower though, if my assumption of less jobs = less money = less likely to have more children is correct] Better than building one building to hold the county, what if the population went from 100,000 to 10,000 and lived a bit more communally. Eventually the world population will go from around 7 billion down to ~1 billion because we just don't have the resources to support this many consumers. _______________________________________________ For more information about sustainability in the Tompkins County area, please visit: http://www.sustainabletompkins.org/ RSS, archives, subscription & listserv information for: [email protected] http://lists.mutualaid.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainabletompkins free hosting by http://www.mutualaid.org
