Or strengthens. If the citizenry cannot afford suburbs, they don't economically suffer when the cost of fuel makes their homes unaffordable.
If the citizenry cannot afford suburbs, they won't be in suburbs anymore. This is not an issue of taxes, but of basic market economics. Of course, if the citizenry can afford suburbs, but the government has made the tax structure as such where the suburbs are unattainable, that's a problem of policy.
The US, though, has used a powerful technology (cheap transportation) to divide itself into ever-growing class differences and unsustainable communities.
This is outright ridiculous. Is technological progress a good thing? Yes. Is technological progress 100% positive? Of course not. Is technological progress the cause of "class differences and unsustainable communities?" That's absolutely laughable. Those are, again, mostly the fault of policies put in place independent of technology, thanks to attempts at central planning, taxation-as-behavior-modification, and so on. Technology, more often than not, is the great equalizer in the areas where government has caused great problems.
This the addiction thing I mentioned; when the fuel is no longer cheap, these lifestyles are no longer possible, and that becomes a problem.
When the fuel is no longer cheap, a better alternative comes into play. It must, as a basic market point. And as it will impact all prices, and thus have to impact all wages, the net result will not be lawless disaster, but rather societal adjustment as it always has every other time there's been a shock to the system when it comes to technology and resources.
Humans are not "addicted" to oxygen. Society is not "addicted" to oil.
Before you jump all over my mention of "class differences," consider what happens when people who grew up with a strong racial and social divide—whites with lots of money living in the gated 'burbs, blacks and others in the cities, the poor where ever they can eek out a living—suddenly find themselves forced to live as their ancestors once did, side by side with the racial and social minorities they don't really like. It could be a good thing, true; it could also be explosive.
I'm hesitant to even dive into this one for any number of reasons, but if you think technology is segregating us as opposed to knocking down those walls, I can't even see your point of view to address it, never mind refute it.
no subject
If the citizenry cannot afford suburbs, they won't be in suburbs anymore. This is not an issue of taxes, but of basic market economics. Of course, if the citizenry can afford suburbs, but the government has made the tax structure as such where the suburbs are unattainable, that's a problem of policy.
The US, though, has used a powerful technology (cheap transportation) to divide itself into ever-growing class differences and unsustainable communities.
This is outright ridiculous. Is technological progress a good thing? Yes. Is technological progress 100% positive? Of course not. Is technological progress the cause of "class differences and unsustainable communities?" That's absolutely laughable. Those are, again, mostly the fault of policies put in place independent of technology, thanks to attempts at central planning, taxation-as-behavior-modification, and so on. Technology, more often than not, is the great equalizer in the areas where government has caused great problems.
This the addiction thing I mentioned; when the fuel is no longer cheap, these lifestyles are no longer possible, and that becomes a problem.
When the fuel is no longer cheap, a better alternative comes into play. It must, as a basic market point. And as it will impact all prices, and thus have to impact all wages, the net result will not be lawless disaster, but rather societal adjustment as it always has every other time there's been a shock to the system when it comes to technology and resources.
Humans are not "addicted" to oxygen. Society is not "addicted" to oil.
Before you jump all over my mention of "class differences," consider what happens when people who grew up with a strong racial and social divide—whites with lots of money living in the gated 'burbs, blacks and others in the cities, the poor where ever they can eek out a living—suddenly find themselves forced to live as their ancestors once did, side by side with the racial and social minorities they don't really like. It could be a good thing, true; it could also be explosive.
I'm hesitant to even dive into this one for any number of reasons, but if you think technology is segregating us as opposed to knocking down those walls, I can't even see your point of view to address it, never mind refute it.