Why We Won't Raise Our Kids in Suburbia

Well, part of the problem is our infrastructure choices over the past many decades. When you build suburbs that are very isolated from places you need to go and then need to drive to literally everything you do, nearly everyone starts viewing normal activities like walking to a grocery store as abnormal. As a result, kids can’t actually go anywhere until they turn 16 and get a car. :/ There are a lot of excellent videos about this sad problem, like this: [this video] But at the end of the day, when it’s not actually possible to be independent every day, you just loose this culture. And countries that made different infrastructure and development decisions 6 decades ago are in a much better place today — it doesn’t have to be this way.

There is a correlation with urban sprawl and the autonomy of children[1]. Depending on where you live, it's harder young people to get around compared to 40 years ago. Like this HN user's experience in this same thread[2]. By making society car centric we have made it difficult for children to exercise independence even if their parents allowed them to. In a non metro area your options as a teen to go somewhere are to beg your parents to drive you somewhere or to walk for hours to a bus stop. These barriers and the rise in pedestrian fatalities do not incentivize autonomy. [1] [this video] Why we won't raise our kids in suburbia [2] [link]

This is the gist of it: [this video] But I grew up in central California and surroundings in the 90's and rode my bike everywhere. And it was horrible. I nearly died multiple times, and drivers were sometimes furious at someone biking on the road. I rode from Sac to Folsom once over a narrow bridge with no shoulder and can't believe I lived. I thought it might be better in cities, but Berkeley, while better, was still mediocre, and Santa Monica was bad. Really, everywhere in the US is somewhere on the spectrum from "merely horrible" to "dire hellscape". Ten years ago my wife and I moved to Ireland. Ireland is also bad, but still massively better than anywhere I've lived in the US. But now we have young kids, and we don't want "better than the US", we want "good enough your child can bike to school, and when people kill children with their cars the people are angry with the driver, not sympathetic towards them". Which means the Netherlands, or perhaps Denmark. So that's where we're going. Ireland being wildly incompetent bureaucratically it took 4 years just to process mine and my wife's naturalisation applications.

[this video] Dangers of Car-Dependent Suburbs: How Urban Planning Affects Parenting In this segment, the speaker highlights the stark contrast between the freedom and independence of Dutch children versus the restrictive upbringing in car-dependent suburbs of North America. By comparing their own childhood in London, Ontario, to their current experiences in Amsterdam, the speaker argues that the Dutch city's design and culture enable children to develop autonomy and independence, whereas North American suburbs lack the necessary infrastructure and social norms to allow children to thrive without excessive parental supervision

Calling everything but cars exclusionary is mildly hilarious. First of all, you're simply forgetting about public transport. That's needed too and pretty much covers all your concerns. However... 1. The disabled? How many of those do you think are disabled in just the right ways to still be able to drive? You know "disabled" doesn't just mean "missing a limb", right? So uh, if the only option is to drive and someone's disabled and therefore can't drive, what do they... do? Anyhow: [1] 2. Kids? How many kids do you see driving cars around? You know 10+ year olds can just... bike on their own, right? Like, to school, etc.? [2] [3] [4] Below that age, just bike them around? [5] ;) > Forcing You know nobody's forcing you to do anything, right? Like, you can still own and use your car, there are some very valid use cases best served by them. For example, around half of the Dutch own a car. They just don't use them as much for really dumb purposes, like driving 5km to a grocery store, because the nearest one is within walking or cycling distance. The problem is that driving has been so heavily subsidized, that we've come to take it for granted and are now truly shocked when asked to pay more to even somewhat offset the real costs. And I'm afraid there's no viable path forward that doesn't involve eventually paying in full. > Forcing people to bike and walk everywhere sounds a lot better if you're in a moderate climate where bad weather means you need to pack a light jacket and wait