MrsBeansAppleSnaps t1_j2al857 wrote
Having a low population density in parts of a state, even a majority of a state, is fine and desirable. Having it everywhere is awful though. The nature argument doesn't hold up; Massachusetts has more conserved land than Maine. It completely hamstrings our economy because companies know they'll have a hard time finding workers. It guarantees that Southern Maine will remain unaffordable (high demand meeting rural zoning=high prices). It means we spend a fortune on cars. It means when a storm hits, 40% of us have no power because we're all in the woods. It means zero usable public transit.
I really don't see a strong argument for mandating rural density everywhere but that's what people here seem to want.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments