One comment on this is that less dense areas make it very hard to build infrastructure. For example, if there are 10 families living on a mile stretch of road, think of how much it costs to build a mile of road, along with (possibly) water and sewer there. And then the annual maintenance cost. And then the other road networks require to connect that one road, etc.
Those 10 families don’t pay nearly enough in taxes to cover the cost of infrastructure maintenance. It relies on grants from state and federal governments, paid for by taxes in dense cities, to cover the expense.
My point: sparse is not objectively better. I think the quality of life we have come to expect in suburbs and rural areas is not possible without the taxes gained from also having dense places.
>>Those 10 families don’t pay nearly enough in taxes to cover the cost of infrastructure maintenance.
I dont think you can objectively say that is true given that road maintenance is one of the least costly things a government does, and the less densely p;populated the less maintenance is done to that road sometimes none at all
That further assumes that the road in those areas is maintained by the government this is also not universally true, there are plenty of housing additions that have HOA's where the HOA is responsible for the road maintenance
Also in almost 100% of cases the developer creating the subdivision is responsible for the infrastructure costs to build said subdivision and also often has to pay to improve infrastructure leading into the new subdivision
Those 10 families don’t pay nearly enough in taxes to cover the cost of infrastructure maintenance. It relies on grants from state and federal governments, paid for by taxes in dense cities, to cover the expense.
My point: sparse is not objectively better. I think the quality of life we have come to expect in suburbs and rural areas is not possible without the taxes gained from also having dense places.
More info, and a very interesting video series here: https://youtu.be/7IsMeKl-Sv0