Letter to Editor re: "free market"A response to some foolishness. (should I be spending my time on this?) Actually, if I take it seriously and treat everyone with respect I'd delete the preceeding and simply write: Response to editorial with highlighted text (what is the techinical term for that set apart and bolded text?),
Added by colin #442 on 2004-05-24. Last modified 2008-03-05 07:55. Originally created 2004-05-24. F0 License: Attribution
|
(Regarding your editorial of May 23rd)
Your free market is in fact habit and happenstance. Large-scale non-mixed-use development has become habit only due to a free-market antithesis: zoning. Auto-centric development has become habit only due to free-market antitheses: massive public subsidization and cost externalization of an auto-based transportation system. Private property owners are in fact lessees to the government. Often governments specify land uses based on what will bring the highest monetary return. However, a concerned populace with a representative government specifies land use that is consistent with its vision of how it wishes to live and what it wishes to become. It does not leave its future to habit and happenstance.
That was in response to:
Dalidio, downtown, and Darwinism/Let the free market determine whether Marketplace and SLO center survive
Which I would like to paste here since you'll eventually have to pay to access that, I think.
Editorials and letters to the editor appear in the Living section. If my letter gets printed and I notice, I'll include a link here.
A related link: Retrospective: Would America Have Been Automobilized in a Free Market?
Critique:
I don't think the wordy style I used is very effective.
2004-05-26
It got published! (on the 26th) And here is what they printed:
Auto-centric habits
Regarding your May 23 editorial:
Your free market is in fact habit and happenstance.
Large-scale, non-mixed-use development has become habit only due to a free-market antithesis: zoning.
Auto-centric development has become habit only due to free-market antitheses: massive public subsidization and cost externalization of an auto-based transportation system.
Private property owners are in fact lessees to the government. Often governments specify land uses based on what will bring the highest monetary return.
However, a concerned populace with a representative government specifies land use that is consistent with its vision of how it wishes to live and what it wishes to become. It does not leave its future to habit and happenstance.
COLIN LEATH
SAN LUIS OBISPO
They did not include the web site address (carfreeuniverse.org).
Here's the link to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Dalidio/San Luis Marketplace Annexation and Development Project.
It does appear to be more mixed-use than I thought, but I wasn't able
to get a good overall view/map of the project from that page... it may
be there and I missed it. The planning commission meeting where the project is expected to be approved is tonight (May 26, 2004) at 7 p.m.. Maybe later the agenda will be in the archives here.
2004-05-27
I went to the planning meeting and made a public comment.