For the universal bestbuy to exist we must believe in a super big brother who defines the components of the best buy, such as “quality of life”. This has been done many times over the centuries. It wasn’t all that long ago that big brother told us to burn a few children every few months in order to keep the gods happy and thereby improve the quality of our lives. Today big brother tells us its OK to kill 4-month old unborn babies, but we are forbidden to kill 200-year old redwood trees. Throughout history the popular edicts of temporarily respected big brothers are seen to be ridiculous in retrospect.

Do the sheeple make bad choices sometimes?
‘Depends on who is the judge and the jury.

They also desire to find a bank to take the mortgage close in if they are serious about acquiring these amenities, and if they have kids, they desire to find a decent school system.

*Rugged individualists, marching in lockstep is the modern paradigm.

$30/hr was just a number to put it in perspective. If you happened to be a parent and you spent that hour a day giving your kids quality attention, it would probably be more like $1000/hr, if you could quantify all the potential benefits, which of course you can’t.

No doubt many people feel that their long commute is a trade off that’s worth it. But I’ll say it again: fewer would feel that way if they were paying the full costs of their lifestyles. And to that I’ll add: I believe that American culture has glorified the suburban way of life to such a degree that many people do not have a realistic perception of other ways of living and the benefits they can offer.

Yes, if only people such as your informed self could rule the Earth what a bright world it would be!

Note to wizard: People do not generally do time-benefit analysis on their lives, but prefer to live as they prefer to live. It’s not all money, is it?

Hmmm…maybe I’ll write these after I’m fully caffeinated.

It’s true that the ideal model of the free market is flawless. The problem is that in the real world all the assumed conditions for flawless free market operation don’t exist and never will.

DS: Nowhere did I say that people shouldn’t be allowed to want a big lawn. What I am saying is that if people had a full understanding of the costs, and had to pay all of them, including the externalitiies, then far fewer would chose sprawl.

That is: many don’t like those densities for various reasons. Lots of folks like bigger yards. The GF has a nice biggish yard that I enjoy being out in - nice and quiet, lots of veggie room.

I think we find in typical preference surveys - there are enough out there now to draw conclusions from - that most people like to have the walkable amenities and stuff close enough to walk to other than the piece of grass where the dog poops. Do most, though, like, say, New Urbanist densities? No. 1/3-1/2 do.

Will that change when gas is 7.00 a gallon, and rents are bid up in properties close to work? Dunno.

We’ve had 3 generations of folks now all growed up or used to suburban lot sizes. Won’t change overnight. Do I want it to change? Yes. Do I want a yard to garden in? Yes, but I’ll take a P-patch if it’s a close walk.

Is everyone like me? No. Chris Nelson thinks that by 2050, a full 25% of demand for housing will be in large-lot single-fam.

The free market is simply the opportunity to spend one’s money, or waste one’s money, as one sees fit.
If the sheeple find that a home in the suburbs is not worth their money they’ll move back. Every money spending decision is a gamble based on hope for future happiness. Sometimes it works; sometimes it doesn’t. (Some folks enjoy the hour’s commute as time for themselves; few folks charge themselves 30 bucks an hour for every hour they are not on the work clock, unless they live only to work.)