The other night I posted a set of tweets questioning the conventional wisdom that cities should prioritize the interests of families and children in policy. Brad called it a “mini blog post,” so I decided to repost it here in its entirety.
Why do so many seem to start with the assumption that cities should prioritize the needs of families with children? [1]
— Steven Yarak (@slyarak) September 8, 2013
e.g. .@cdcatx claims "Great cities are nests for children," but what does "great" mean and how many kids are needed to reach that bar? [2]
— Steven Yarak (@slyarak) September 8, 2013
25.6% of the Austin population is 0-19, & while college kids may skew that a bit, it's roughly in line with NY @ 24.4% and LA @ 26.2%. [3]
— Steven Yarak (@slyarak) September 8, 2013
OTOH, Vancouver BC comes in with only 16.6% and San Francisco at a paltry 15.5%. Are those not "great" cities? [4]
— Steven Yarak (@slyarak) September 8, 2013
The amenities of cities matter more to the young, and they'll pay more for them. Why should policy try to put its thumb on the scale? [6]
— Steven Yarak (@slyarak) September 8, 2013
Most broadly, what's wrong with living different phases of one's life in different forms of the built environment? [7]
— Steven Yarak (@slyarak) September 8, 2013
I received a couple replies making the political case (largely that parents are over represented at the ballot box), but that’s not really the issue I was trying to get at. That any given group which wields disproportionate political clout tends to get their way is hardly a novel idea. The most incisive response (which I am unfortunately unable to embed) was this:
because it helps support their suburban ideals since 50 years of history tell us kids = suburbs!
I think there might be something to this.
The “but what about the children?” argument is evergreen (and ever specious), and it serves an anti-urban agenda as well as any other. In this case the thought process of the anti-urbanites would go something like this:
- Cities should be good for kids.
- Urbanism is bad (for kids).
- Suburbanism is good (for kids).
- Therefore, our cities should attempt to mimic the suburban form.
That is, of course, ridiculous on its face, but if you’re an anti-urbanite trying to justify your agenda, I can see how you might dupe yourself into believing it.