The problem with living on the edge of the countryside is that eventually somebody else builds on the countryside part and you’re just living in another crappy suburb.
The issue is not gardening, it is taking more land from nature. That’s actually the first reason for biodiversity loss way before any kind of pollution we may produce. So the smallest is the ground footprint of your place the less you play a role in that, hence why an apartment in a tall building is best on that matter. Extended suburbs with gardens are the worst on that matter.
well i might be wrong about this but last time i checked all infrastructure of modern society (and i assume that includes houses and cities) takes up about 3% of our land. That is not so much, if you compare it to agriculture which takes up much more (i forgot the exact number). So i would argue that gardens aren’t the biggest problem.
Frankly, if you have ten billion people on a planet, of course it’s gonna impact the environment. There is no way to avoid that. I wouldn’t start nitpicking with whether people can have a garden or not, though. A garden can help people with a fresh source of vegetables which can improve health and wellbeing, and strengthen independence and community-building, maybe, if the garden is shared or vegetables are distributed among neighbours. It also reduces the transport distance for vegetables which saves on emissions. So, a garden can be a meaningful part of human life, i’d argue.
The problem with living on the edge of the countryside is that eventually somebody else builds on the countryside part and you’re just living in another crappy suburb.
Exactly, this mindset just creates more suburbs, roads, cars, unwalkable districts, etc.
Houses with gardens are immoral, you should either commit to being a farmer, or live in a flat if you’ve got any sense.
Sweet damn you people must literally be sobbing all the fucking time. Explain to me the injustices of… Gardening is it now?
The issue is not gardening, it is taking more land from nature. That’s actually the first reason for biodiversity loss way before any kind of pollution we may produce. So the smallest is the ground footprint of your place the less you play a role in that, hence why an apartment in a tall building is best on that matter. Extended suburbs with gardens are the worst on that matter.
well i might be wrong about this but last time i checked all infrastructure of modern society (and i assume that includes houses and cities) takes up about 3% of our land. That is not so much, if you compare it to agriculture which takes up much more (i forgot the exact number). So i would argue that gardens aren’t the biggest problem.
Frankly, if you have ten billion people on a planet, of course it’s gonna impact the environment. There is no way to avoid that. I wouldn’t start nitpicking with whether people can have a garden or not, though. A garden can help people with a fresh source of vegetables which can improve health and wellbeing, and strengthen independence and community-building, maybe, if the garden is shared or vegetables are distributed among neighbours. It also reduces the transport distance for vegetables which saves on emissions. So, a garden can be a meaningful part of human life, i’d argue.
Unhinged take
Yes.
Is rural living also immortal to you? At least near me the economics of becoming a farmer aren’t terrible but lots of them have second jobs.
My advice in that case is to immediately plant some trees around the perimeter of your property and turn it into a little isolated grove
A man grove, with a man cave.