[ May 20, 2004, 10:55 AM: Message edited by: Alexa ]
Posted by Alexa (Member # 6285) on :
echo!
Posted by Alexa (Member # 6285) on :
...cho....
Posted by Alexa (Member # 6285) on :
I've got the whole world in my hands, I've got the whole wide world in my hands.
*Dances in this vast empty space and is reminded of a certain D&D cartoon I watched as a kid where they were stuck in infinity.*
Posted by Axela (Member # 6558) on :
???axela, seY
-Axela
Posted by Alexa (Member # 6285) on :
NOOOOOOOOOOOOoooooooooooooooooooo! My alternate universe evil twin has found me! Now one of two things will happen. Either I will spend eternity fighting myself like Star Trek, or something much worse…
Posted by Alexa (Member # 6285) on :
*hums to self*
"rats live on no evil star"
Posted by aspectre (Member # 2222) on :
Well, I'm me. And you are certainly not me.
SO WHAT THE HECK ARE YOU DOING IN MY THREAD???!!!???
Posted by Alexa (Member # 6285) on :
It has begun....everyone is going to move into my paradise. I better start legislating environmental protection laws to keep the masses off of my land. I can appreciate this thread, but if the traffic gets too heavy, I better keep the pollution out (and my satisfaction in).
Posted by Lupus (Member # 6516) on :
invades the private space stretches out
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
The ultimate onanism thread...
Posted by cochick (Member # 6167) on :
sets up franchises on every corner
Posted by Telperion the Silver (Member # 6074) on :
*leads the vast Hiigaran Navy to invade*
Muwhahaha!
Battlecruisers fire!
Posted by Ron Lambert (Member # 2872) on :
Sets loose a bunch of Scott Ridley type Aliens.
Posted by Alexa (Member # 6285) on :
According to the "Alexa's Space Charter," There shall at no time be a Wal*Mart, Starbucks, or McDonalds. All none Alexa entities are herby regulated to take no less then one 2"x2" plot of space for no longer then 20-30 minutes. If there are any lines and Alexa approaches, you are all to immediately vacate the premise--especially on any roller coasters.
I will keep the cleanliness and open space of my land.
If you are willing to pay me 50cents via pay pal, I will extend your visitation privileges. If National parks can keep me out, by golly I can keep you all out!
*Readies Cruise Missiles*
LEAVE!!!
[edit] Hires a legion of Predators to take care of the aliens, sends armed lawyers to the franchises.
[ May 19, 2004, 04:59 PM: Message edited by: Alexa ]
Posted by Farmgirl (Member # 5567) on :
*dumps nuclear waste in thread before she can write and implement her environmental laws*
FG
Posted by Alexa (Member # 6285) on :
*depressing music enters*
Why does my heart Feel so bad? Why does my soul Feel so bad?
These open doors
*repeat*
Posted by Alexa (Member # 6285) on :
It didn't take long for other Hatrack members to move into this post. I knew you would. I was depending on someone to bring weapons or waste to such an uncontaminated thread.
It just goes to show: "If you build it, they will come." We all know what "they" bring.
I would like to use our group behavior to introduce the purpose of this thread:
I live near a National Park (np) in the USA. Close to the park is a town I will call "X." X has got very few people who live there, and they enjoy a nice quiet town with a wonderful view of the np.
A few years ago, a developer wanted to develop housing. X threw a fit. It was environmentally unsound. Environmentalism was used as an excuse to keep the development out, as any new development would take away the beauty of the np.
The developer eventually won and has started the development. I am no fan of development, as we are suburbanizing so much of the natural beauty around us, but the population is growing, people are reproducing or moving, and so what right does someone have who is appreciating the benefit of living so close to nature have in stopping the development on the land that they are developed on?
But if they don't stop development, then the land/population/city will get more violence, waste, and franchises. Just look at Hatrack.
Is environmentalism justified in keeping others out so the environmentalists alone enjoy nature? Is there something we can do about sprawl?
[ May 20, 2004, 11:20 AM: Message edited by: Alexa ]
Posted by Bokonon (Member # 480) on :
Alexa, we can always build up, not out.
-Bok
Posted by Telperion the Silver (Member # 6074) on :
Alexa you are too cute!
Posted by Farmgirl (Member # 5567) on :
I agree in part with what Bok just said.
For instance, here in Wichita, land of the wide open spaces and vast prairie, developers are spreading the city wider and wider. The core dies off, the "old city" part becomes slum. All the rich yuppies move onto the "edge" of town, which then no longer becomes an edge, so they build yet again another 10-15 miles "away" from town, and the city grows to them. Some because of school district (the Maize school district now has a larger STUDENT population than the population of the actual city limits of Maize itself, due to urban sprawl from Wichita.)
The problem with this development and sprawl? It is eating up vast amounts of prime farmland. Farmland we use to feed people like those who live in the cities. $$$$ and high taxes convince bordering farmers to finally give up and sell their farmland to developers as houses grow up around them.
I have often thought -- if Wichita were in a terrain that blocked it in by mountains, or an ocean, or some such, then there wouldn't be such sprawl. Do they build on it just because they CAN? Because the demand is there, and the price is affordable? What if someone were to build a great wall around Wichita, and no building could be done outside of this wall? Wouldn't people be forced to find better, more effective ways to develop what is already here? Sort of a re-use, re-cycle theory?
Farmgirl
[ May 20, 2004, 02:18 PM: Message edited by: Farmgirl ]
Posted by zgator (Member # 3833) on :
You can build up, but if the land is available, it's a lot cheaper to build out.
Posted by Apocalypse (Member # 4819) on :
Big Box businesses, cruise missiles, and suburban sprawl?
Eeeeexcellent...
Posted by Alexa (Member # 6285) on :
*breaks out steel retractor* Now we are getting to the heart of this thread.
quote: All the rich yuppies move onto the "edge" of town, which then no longer becomes an edge, so they build yet again another 10-15 miles "away" from town, and the city grows to them.
This is the one of the main examples of the hypocrisy I find with those concerned with sprawl. Notice, Farmgirl already lives in Wichita (an assumption I admit--I am open to correction, tho the point would remain almost as valid) and has a hostile feeling from the environmental consequences of the "yuppies." Aren't we all taking up space? Do we have more rights to try and appreciate the beauties of the earth because we got here first?
quote: $$$$ and high taxes convince bordering farmers to finally give up and sell their farmland to developers as houses grow up around them.
How should we go about *encouraging* these farmers to not sell off their land? Should we take away some of their land rights, or should we manipulate the tax system to keep them trapped on their land? Maybe we can make zoning restrictions that take away land rights of future buyers?
quote: Wouldn't people be forced to find better, more effective ways to develop what is already here? Sort of a re-use, re-cycle theory?
What are some ways we could "force" the issue of sprawl?
[note] this is not a rip on Farmgirl. I have the same feelings, with the exception of the consequences of loosing farm land. I think we are doing fine with food production and if we ever get in trouble, market forces will make farm land more valuable. The loss of nature and the ugliness of sprawl offends me and makes me angry. Hear that Californians--Stay Out! I just don't know how to address the issue.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Taunt]](graemlins/taunt.gif)
I just don't know how to address the issue.