3114
Comments (125)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
8
spezisacuckold 8 points ago +8 / -0

The best way to go about it would be the environmental route. Use preservation of nature as a means to get enough votes.

7
Isolated_Patriot 7 points ago +7 / -0

Unfortunately this is exactly what they do in Canada. You guys should look into just how bad it is up here for the property market and how much it's been used to infect 90% of the population with the belief that "nobody needs a large home with a yard, everyone should be renting in multi-family homes!" Seriously, this kind of the regulation is pretty much the heart of how Communism has spread so far up here.

5
War_Hamster 5 points ago +5 / -0

Agenda 21 at work.

3
spezisacuckold 3 points ago +3 / -0

I think you may have my idea backwards.

Take Connecticut for example.

In Fairfield County 89% of land is classified for residential zoning of over one acre. This ensures that housing developments are low density and they preserve the status quo political culture.

Now do that, but for a right wing political culture and at the state level.

7
War_Hamster 7 points ago +7 / -0

The cities should have collapsed under their debt, but Wall Street and Congressional bailouts have delayed that.

4
SHALL_NOT 4 points ago +4 / -0

I like that angle. Conservatives don’t really need to be fed a reason to contain the cities. But libs will eat up environmental reasons. You can have the city, a ring of suburbs around it, then a ring of solar/wind power fields to put the city on renewable energy.

They’ll love that renewable shit, but it’s really our way of locking them in. No expanding beyond that shit and it ain’t moving.

2
Saremei 2 points ago +2 / -0

But they argue that they need higher density living to reduce habitat destruction.

1
spezisacuckold 1 point ago +1 / -0

“CIVIL RIGHTS OVER PROFITS”

There’s your slogan. It will appeal to a non insignificant chunk of leftists who will never think this through.