You're assuming infinite variety exists, or can exist. That's so absurd that it's hard to believe it was meant in good faith. No, I can't just select from a menu. What if I want good schools and other facilities that few towns have, and proximity to the people/places that matter to me, and a town that's not so much single-family-home wasteland everywhere but the center? What if I want other people who aren't millionaires to have access to some of these things? Oops, me moving doesn't solve that. Sometimes you have to build the kind of place you want (or think should exist) and there's absolutely nothing wrong with that. Every town that already exists has been shaped by the conscious choices of people who live there and vote there and serve in offices there. I have just as much right to push for what I want as any of them did.
P.S. Almost forgot to point out the "making them all the same" strawman. Never suggested that, champ.
> You're assuming infinite variety exists, or can exist.
I'm assuming no such thing. I'm only assuming that there are places that would match your preferences better than where you currently live (or, if you want to be really precise, enough better to justify the costs of moving). Since people move all the time, for precisely that reason (I've done it myself, several times), that does not seem to me like a very extravagant assumption.
It is true that no place will be perfect: no place will satisfy literally all of someone's preferences. (There may be rare people that can find such a place, but they are going to be rare enough that we can ignore them for this discussion.) But I did not claim that you could find a place that would be perfect for you. I only claimed that you could find a place that would be better than where you currently are.
> Every town that already exists has been shaped by the conscious choices of people who live there and vote there and serve in offices there.
That's true. And if you think enough other people in your town would support your desired changes, you can of course get them to help you enact them, and then you won't have to move. But that is likely to take a lot more time and effort than moving to a place that already matches your preferences better than where you are now. I didn't say moving was the only solution to your problem. I only said it was the simplest one.
> moving to a place that already matches your preferences better than where you are now
Still assuming there is such a a place. Why would you assume (again) that I didn't already research and consider alternatives before plonking down a third of my net worth on a house? I live where I do because it was the best match for what I'm looking for, but the fact that it's the best available doesn't mean I can't wish it to be better for myself and others.
Also, even if there were such a better place already, moving itself isn't a no-op. Moving even between ideal locations can be considered worse than staying even in one non-ideal location. Pulling kids out of a school system and away from all of their friends is particularly disruptive. "Love it or leave it" only works for one constituency - those who are fine with the status quo, who don't have or seek any connection to their communities, and don't see a need for there to be more of anything else. It doesn't even engage with people whose circumstances or beliefs are different; it just ignores their existence. I don't think that's constructive. Why are you so dead set against people solving problems instead of running away from them?
> "Just move" only works for one constituency - those who don't have or want any connection to whatever community they live in
Not at all. People can change communities. The fact that a person chooses to move does not mean that had no connection to the place they are leaving, or that they won't form any connections to the place they move to. Maybe you can't imagine ever being connected to any other place than the one you live in right now, but not everyone is like you.
> Pulling kids out of a school system and away from all of their friends is particularly disruptive.
It could be. Or it could be an opportunity to broaden their horizons and give them a chance to make new friends, and to cease having to deal with the kids at their school that they can't stand.
> I live where I do because it's the best match for what I'm looking for
Your original post in this subthread didn't make it sound that way. But if that is in fact the case for you, that's fine. It might not be the case for many other people.
> Maybe you can't imagine ever being connected to any other place than the one you live in right now
I've lived 20 places in my life, from New Zealand to Massachusetts. I know all about uprooting oneself to seek something better, broadening horizons, etc. Please stop making convenient personal assumptions.
> I've lived 20 places in my life, from New Zealand to Massachusetts.
Then I fail to understand why you seem unable to comprehend why people might want to move.
> Please stop making convenient personal assumptions.
It seems to me that you are the one who is doing that: you seem to be assuming that, since you, after moving many times, have now found a place you want to stay in, nobody else can have any reason to move.
Are you just conflating "no reason to move" with "moving doesn't always solve a problem" for rhetorical effect? Because I find no value in that. Find another target.
> Almost forgot to point out the "making them all the same" strawman. Never suggested that, champ
If you succeeded in making your desired changes in your town, what would happen to the people that didn't want them--that like things the way they are now?
P.S. Almost forgot to point out the "making them all the same" strawman. Never suggested that, champ.