Finance, design, suburbs and “The Growth Ponzi Scheme.”

0
182

It doesn’t get much clearer than this. In fact, the Strong Towns website in large measure constitutes a shovel-ready campaign platform for any candidate interested in the future of a city like New Albany.

(That’s okay, Dan. you’re exempt. Permanent recess for you! Yay!)

The conclusion first:

“We need to end our investments in the suburban pattern of development, along with the multitude of direct and indirect subsidies that make it all possible. Further, we need to intentionally return to our traditional pattern of development, one based on creating neighborhoods of value, scaled to actual people. When we do this, we will inevitably rediscover our traditional values of prudence and thrift as well as the value of community and place.”

Now, let’s read.

THE GROWTH PONZI SCHEME (Strong Towns)

(This article originally appeared in Grist)

We often forget that the American pattern of suburban development is an experiment, one that has never been tried anywhere before. We assume it is the natural order because it is what we see all around us. But our own history — let alone a tour of other parts of the world — reveals a different reality. Across cultures, over thousands of years, people have traditionally built places scaled to the individual. It is only the last two generations that we have scaled places to the automobile.

How is our experiment working?

At Strong Towns, the nonprofit, nonpartisan organization I cofounded in 2009, we are most interested in understanding the intersection between local finance and land use. How does the design of our places impact their financial success or failure?

What we have found is that the underlying financing mechanisms of the suburban era — our post-World War II pattern of development — operates like a classic Ponzi scheme, with ever-increasing rates of growth necessary to sustain long-term liabilities.

LEAVE A REPLY