Close Knit Networks in Cities

"Over time, density became a boon, economically, socially, intellectually. Living in a city became a way to encourage health. People could walk where they needed to go and support one another in tight-knit social networks."

That's from a NYTimes article on people leaving big cities.

Back in the day  the stereotype was that cities were the places where people were alone and lonely, finding solitude and privacy, enjoying anonymity.  At least that was one stereotype.  Another was cities were homes to ethnic groups (representing the last gasp of immigration before the restrictions of the 1924? act kicked in).  By the 60's the stereotype was of the black inner city ghetto.  

Perhaps it's true that for WASP migrants from the rural areas and suburbs the cities represented a freedom from small-minded prejudices and rigid social norms enforced by the community, or at least it was true enough for a sufficient number of writers for them to perpetuate the stereotype. 

Anyhow, things change. 

Are High Tax Cities Doomed?

Conservatives and libertarians like to point to migration away from high tax locations like California and the Northeast to lower tax locations like Texas and the Sunbelt.  The implication is that high taxes in the long run doom a location/city to decline and doom.   In light of that I found this excerpt from an interesting  Jstor daily piece on the invention of street lighting by a Dutch painter to be interesting:

By 1670 Amsterdam boasted 1,800 street lamps, and by 1681 2,400 lamps. Adding all these lights was a colossal and expensive undertaking, and taxes in Amsterdam rose to pay for it. But seventeenth-century Amsterdam was already famous for its high municipal taxes. This new lighting system was so popular that cities across Holland, Europe, and eventually Japan, began to implement the same.

When I Was a Boy

Neon lights were the thing.  Neon was the trademark, the signifier of life, of modernity, of jazz.  

Here's George Benson singing the song.

And here's a picture, hat tip James Fallows, which shows just how overboard we went with neon.

Urban Density Versus Urban Farming

Many people, Matt Yglesias  for one, believe in urban density, arguing that it's efficient, supports interesting lifestyles, helps the environment, etc. etc.  Many of the same sort of people (i.e., highly educated types) believe in the food movement, some of whom believe in urban farming.   There's tension between the two principles.  This piece in Modern Farmer on the battle over converting an urban garden to an urban hospital shows the tension.

"New York is the rat’s ideal habitat"

Growing up in Upstate New York, we knew that instinctively.  New York City was the home of all that was strange, and foreign, and bad, at least on those days when my mother, born in the city, didn't reminisce about going to the American Museum of Natural History during her visits to her grandmother.

The sentence is from a good article in the New York Times Magazines on rats and other aspects of urban ecology.  Did you know that white-footed mice are so "neophobic" (afraid of the new, like me) that the city supports genetically distinct populations?

Student Loans and Urbanism

Buried in a Post piece on the "echo boomers" living in DC and Arlington is this observation:

“What you’re seeing in Arlington and Washington is that you can live here without a car,” said Harriet Tregoning, director of the District’s Office of Planning. She says that is a boon for people who owe a lot of money on college loans: “If you don’t have a car, you can pay off your college debt quickly. As long as it’s expensive to go to college, we have a competitive advantage.”

It makes sense to me.  Of course I've also heard that the average/median (not sure which) rent in DC is around $2,100.  That's a bunch.  Of course if you're young you can squeeze up.  And there appears to be a new phenomenon.  Back in the day I lived just south of Logan Circle.  And for the next 25 years there were alternating stories in the Post--problems with prostitution and other urban ills in the area and people renovating old houses amidst the crime. 

In this century it seems to me the renovation and crime story is much less common, the more common one is the influx of young, mostly white inhabitants.  I don't know whether crime is less, there's a more rapid flow of new people, the newspaper mindset is different, or what's going on, but I think there's a big differenc.e

Big Apple Men Are Gentlemen

According to the NYTimes, a study of subway manners showed that more men stand than women, indicating that  New York city men are gentlemen.

Ode to Village Life

Here's a paean to village life:

"The Joys of American Village Life in the 1800s

How different is the state of things to-day, and in our own country! Village life as it exists in America is indeed one of the happiest fruits of modern civilization. Our ancestors, familiar with the English and French villages, could never have dreamed of all the many striking differences which would appear two centuries later in the village homes of their own descendants in the New World. The idea would never have occurred to them that the remote village could ever share so freely in the enlightenment and civilization of the capital city. But steam, the great magician, serves the rustic to-day as faithfully as he serves the cockney.13

  Comforts, conveniences, new inventions, striking improvements are scarcely known in New York and Philadelphia, before they are brought to the villages, hundreds of miles in the interior. You find there every real advantage of modern life. Your house is lighted by gas -- and, if you choose, it is warmed by steam. The morning paper, with the latest telegram from Paris or London, lies on your dinner-table. The best new books, the latest number of the best magazines, reach you almost as soon as they reach the Central Park. Early vegetables from Bermuda, and early fruits from Cuba, are offered at your door. You may telegraph, if you wish it, to St. Petersburg or Calcutta, by taking up your hat and walking into the next street. This evening you may, perhaps, hear a good lecture, and to-morrow a good concert. The choice musical instrument and the fine engraving may be found in your cottage parlor.

What more can any reasonable being ask for, in the way of physical and intellectual accessories of daily life? And in addition to these advantages of modern civilization shared with the cities, there are others of far higher value, belonging more especially to country life. The blessings of pure air and pure water are luxuries, far superior to all the wines of Delmonico14, and all the diamonds of Ball & Black.15 And assuredly to all eyes but those of the blindest cockney, the groves and gardens and fields and brooks and rivers make up a frame-work for one's everyday life rather more pleasing than the dust-heaps, and omnibuses, and shop-windows of Broadway. And, happily for the rustic world, the vices, the whims and extravigances -- the fashionable sin, the pet folly - - of the hour are somewhat less prevalent, somewhat less tyrannical on the greensward than on the pavement. There is more of leisure for thought and culture and good feeling in the country than amid the whirl of a great city. True, healthful refinement of head and heart becomes more easy, more natural under the open sky and amid the fresh breeze of country life

. Probably much the largest number of the most pleasant and happiest homes in the land may be found to-day in our villages and rural towns -- homes where truth, purity, the holiest affections, the highest charities and healthful culture are united with a simplicity of life scarcely possible on our extravagant cities. And these advantages, thanks be to God, are not confined to one class. Even the poorest day-laborer in the village, if he be honest and temperate, leads a far happier and easier life than his brother in the cities. The time may come, perhaps, when the cities -- greatly diminished in size -- shall be chiefly abandoned to the drudgeries of business, to commerce and manufactures during the hours of day and deserted at night; when the families of the employers and laborers shall live alike in suburban village homes. In the present state of civilization, every hamlet within a hundred miles of a large city may be considered as one of its suburbs. In former centuries, he was a wise man who left the village for the city. To-day, he is wise who goes to the city as to a market, but has a home in the country."

The author is Susan Fenimore Cooper, the year is 1869.   [Threw in some paragraph breaks.]

The Victory of Government Over the Natural Life

In the old days (i.e. 18th century) cities like London were sinks, people sinks, places where people died, not places where people were born and grew.  The rural areas exported people to the city.  Such facts of history have long governed our perceptions of the relative healthiness of cities versus country.  But over time good government of the city, providing things like clean water, sanitation, reasonably clean air, good healthcare, etc. have changed the balance, leading to today's announcement that New York City, the epitome of the city for Americans, is now healthier than the rest of America.  A baby born in NYC today has a longer life expectancy than a baby born elsewhere.

Why You Can't Keep Them Down on the Farm

Roving Bandit quotes a professor on 7 reasons you can't keep people down on the farm (phrased as "reasons urban growth is a reasonable and natural phenomenon". (economies of scale, centrality,diversity cover some of the seven). The same rules mean bigger cities grow bigger.

Meanwhile Megan McArdle had a recent visit to China and an interesting post on rural life, including observations on how the government is trying to slow the rush of people to cities:

Yet even this level of income is achieved by substantial government intervention.  In part to slow the pace of urbanization to a manageable level, in part because they're worried about food security, and in part presumably just because they don't want the farmers to starve, the government offers some pretty hefty subsidies to rural communities.  The crop prices are supported above market levels; the houses, appliances, and someday cars, are acquired with substantial discounts through government programs.  According to our hosts, without those subsidies, it's not clear that there would be anyone left on Chinese farms.  Chinese agriculture is amazingly productive, as I mentioned, but it's also amazingly labor intensive, and tends to be done on a small scale; they can't compete with the massive farms of North and South America.

Urban Farming, Its Ironies

I don't know the history of the garden, but in Ben Affleck's The Town some key scenes take place in the Charlestown community garden (can't find a link to the garden on line, but Google gives some possibilities and the picture link shows it's rather lush.  Cynic that I am I'll be interested in the director's commentary on the garden.

The food movement loves to embrace urban farming.  That's fine, if there's a vacant lot, if you don't have park money the best use you can make of it is to open a community garden.  It's good for the community and good for the environment.

However, and you knew there was a however coming, the environmental benefits of the urban setting come from density.  New York City is one of the best places to live to have the smallest impact on the environment, simply because it's efficient to live and work in dense places.  (Recently there's been challenges to the benefits of telework because it might be more efficient to heat and light offices for 1,000 people than 1,000 homes each with its own officeworker working from home, even considering the costs of commuting.)

The market tells us it's not efficient to have permanent farms in the heart of the city.  I'm enough of a conservative to believe it.