We need ‘Goldilocks,’ not ‘voodoo,’ urbanism
Frankly I&#x27;m not certain how his proposed system is any better than the one where all the cool kids move to San Fran?<p>I mean, there are just some realities about <i>people</i> that, I think, are oftentimes overlooked. He calls them &quot;social networks&quot;, but at their root, it&#x27;s the manifestation of the tendency for humans to be tribal. You can try to move San Fran to Omaha Nebraska if you like, but it won&#x27;t work. People are tribal. The cool kids will still want to hang with the cool kids. In fact, it&#x27;s extremely probable that the cool kids would just not move.<p>I&#x27;ll even go one step further and say that not only will the new proposal fail to elicit the desired behavior from the cool kids, but I&#x27;ll go ahead and predict that this proposed change would also do nothing to better the lot of, say, impoverished minorities. It&#x27;s just a fact of life that the human proclivity for tribalism will work against them. It worked against them in the post war &quot;urban sprawl&quot; model, it&#x27;s working against them in the current &quot;urban revival&quot; model, and it will work against them in the &quot;goldilocks&quot; model. Why has it worked against them so consistently over time? Because we&#x27;re not changing the people, we&#x27;re just changing the model.<p>And so much of what is happening is due to people, and how people think and behave.