Comment 94828

By viennacafe (registered) | Posted November 17, 2013 at 22:22:20 in reply to Comment 94827

Yes, which is why my first sentence read, in part: "One of the reasons mention was transportation ...". One of, meaning not the only reason.

You seem to be trying to prod an argument out of me and I am an accommodating fellow but not at all passive aggressive.

So, here was argument then, when London was holding meetings on the issue of Creative Cities (paraphrased and in a nutshell): London must decide what it wants to be - whether it wants to be a city, or a collection of suburbs united only by ribbons of roads. An economy built around a model of building houses and cars and dependent 0n the infinite consumption of finite resources, including green fields, is inherently unsustainable economically or ecologically. If London wishes to have a successful and prosperous economy, it must be productive, local, and geared towards 20 years in the future rather than 20 years in the past.

And the same can be said for Hamilton and any other North American city.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds