He's led a pretty shelterd life if he hasn't discovered stuff like this now. Not that McCain has ever taken too many steps away from his limo either.

Sounds like it'll take a bit to get the density up. 80 million! Does Sam know how far behind we are in the density factor?

MW

It's 60 million not 80. There's plenty of countryside thanks to the town and country act (actual growth boundaries not the vast ever-expanding version we have here)and you can actually walk in it thanks to ancient footpaths and the right to roam.

"Does Sam know how far behind we are in the density factor?"

Just be glad those condos aren't going in your neighborhood. It's the plan!

"There's plenty of countryside thanks to the town and country act..."

Enjoy walking in that countryside. It's about all the leisure you'll be able to afford after paying for some of the most expensive housing in the world.

Land use controls do make residential property more scarce and more expensive. Sprawl, on the other hand, hides these costs by diverting money to highways and oil wars, and ruining residents' health with air pollution.

"Oregon, one of the nicest of the 57 states." - Obama

Does Sam know how far behind we are in the density factor?

Since we only live on about 4 percent of the land in this state, we probably are not that far behind. And as the enviros keep getting their way, I am sure that percentage will get smaller as we go.

live on about 4 percent of the land in this state

This is the Canard of the Century. Large portions of the state would not support a major population, and are too far away from everything that anyone would want to live there, anyway. The real land use tensions are over a relatively small portion of the state's land mass.

"Oregon, one of the nicest of the 57 states." - Obama

Coming from a Bush fan, that's funnier than you think.

It's about all the leisure you'll be able to afford after paying for some of the most expensive housing in the world.

Actually, we were in a little town called Sandbach (pronounced SAND-batch) outside of Chester just last fall and the housing prices there were not too far off the mark of Portland. You could get a five-bedroom with a nice lot for about $600,000. Of course, there were a lot more expensive places, too. All of it too rich for my blood, but thankfully I grabbed on before the prices here went sky high.

"Oregon, one of the nicest of the 57 states." - Obama

the USA doesn't have 50 "states", my friend.

if you want to get "accurate", the US has 46 states, 6 commonwealths (including Puerto Rico and the Northern Marianas), the Federal District of Columbia, 13 additional Protectorates and three other countries under Compacts of Free Association.

and, if you want to be more philosophical, several other countries act as little more than unofficial "states"--we get to do everything to them except tax them.

i believe it's what used to be called an Empire, before the currently perverted usage of "Democracy" took hold.

Ecohuman, I think you win the award for the guy who wants everyone to know how much he knows, but doesn't know maybe as much as he thinks. For purposes of the US Constitution (see, for example, Article IV and Article VII of the US Constitution), there are 50 "states". Massachusetts (for example) styles itself a "Commonwealth", but it's constitutional status is a "state", which the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico is most certainly not.

Ecohuman, I think you win the award for the guy who wants everyone to know how much he knows, but doesn't know maybe as much as he thinks

thanks, Bob, it's good to be ridiculed. my point whooshed by you, so let me be more literal--i'm saying it's silly to make much of Obama saying "57 states." does that make more sense?

and, there really are four commonwealths inside America and two outside. Puerto Rico gets to vote but doesn't have equal representation in Congress. it's not as black and white as you might think.

now, back to making those cappuccinos. who wants extra foam?

The more I hear from this guy, the more I fear for this country under him. The phrase, 'doesn't have a clue' fits him to a tee.

Allan L. Land use controls do make residential property more scarce and more expensive.
JK This is the only thing that you got right.

Allan L. Sprawl, on the other hand, hides these costs by
JK “Compact cities” actually cost much more than sprawl. Portland just hides the costs with cash payments to developers, tax abatements (see SavePortland.com, DebunkingPortland.com), toy trains that cost 10 times what driving costs and a myriad of other schemes. Gas would have to get over $100 / GALLON to match the cost of MAX.

Allan L. diverting money to highways
JK Highways are entirely paid by user fees (with lots leftover to subsidize transit), unlike transit which is 80% paid by taxpayers. See Mark Delucchi, ACCESS NUMBER 16 • SPRING 2000, page 12 (PortlandFacts.com/Roads/Docs/Delucchi_Chart.htm); Mallinckrodt, 11 November, 2002, October 2007
(urbantransport.org/costcomp.pdf)

Allan L. and oil wars,
JK Yeah, I notice Trimet is immune to diesel prices. NOT.
The reality is that transit DOES NOT save energy. Transit uses more oil than small cars. If you want to save energy get people into smaller cars, not Trimet’s cattle cars.

Allan L. and ruining residents' health with air pollution.
JK Oh, yeah the polluted countryside compared to the pristine clean air in downtown. Where do you get this crap? High density IS A CAUSE of pollution because it packs many more people closer together, so their pollution is also packed closer together. Pollution becomes more intense, the area more polluted. Remember pollution is pollutants per area. Same pollutants, more area = less pollution = healthier air = suburbs.

If you happen to think people drive more in the burbs, you probably think most people work downtown. NOT. Only about 20% of a region’s jobs are downtown anymore. That is why suburbanites don’t drive more than city dwellers (until you get to densities similar to New York). See Dunphy and Fisher, Transportation Research Record, No. 1552 (PortlandFacts.com/Smart/DensityCongestion.htm)

Me thinks you have been spending too much time reading the Sierra Club Weekly reader. You probably should refresh yourself on the lies that planners tell us. See PortlandFacts.com/Smart/SmartGrowthLies.html

Thanks
JK

Sherwood 9:12am: here's plenty of countryside thanks to the town and country act (actual growth boundaries not the vast ever-expanding version we have here)

Actually there is plenty of roaming you can do in Oregon since a little over half is owned by USFS, BLM, and State of Oregon. This does not include vast tracts that are zoned Forest and can never be inhabited. Roam away, but bring your own food.

Since Sam advocates for more extreme population growth, more intensified density, taller buildings throughout many of our city's zoning categories, then how can Great Britain accommodate 70 Million without mostly high rise districts like SoWhat and the Pearl?

There are other ways to achieve moderate density without high rises. Europe is full of examples of higher density without energy consuming high rises that exceeds horizontal density energy use.

OK, Ecohuman, I agree that harping on the "57 state" thing is dumb. Obama misspoke. It's dumb to attack it, and just as dumb to defend it. I'll have mine with extra foam please.

Sam and Obama would love nothing more for us to become more like England. Higher taxes, gun bans and more social welfare. I find it ironic that we left England for a change and now our leaders want exactly what they have.

I thought our euro-american ancestors left England because of religious repression, not to get away from social welfare.

As far as density goes, I knew Oregon was less dense (without living a sheltered life) but didn't realize the difference was so great.