The fact is we went from having less than 200 million people in 1930 to having 300 million in 1990. More now. Where are we supposed to put all these people?
In addition...the total number of households is WAY above 1/3 more than in 1930. Where are we supposed to put all these houses?
The flip side of a pro-life mentality is a pro-growth development policy. Or (just to cover the logical options), a proportionate decrease in living standards.
I just thought that was excellently put. I have zero patience with the to my mind arrogant idea that everyone in the world has a moral obligation, which perhaps can even be pushed or enforced by the government, to live either in crowded cities or on "authentic" subsistence farms. Let the crunchies do that if it pleases them, but the suburbs have been a great boon to a great many people. People have to live somewhere. The idea of crunching (pun intended) them into the cities or spreading them out on preserved small-farm land without the in-between option of the suburbs is inhumane and manifests an inhuman green attitude. At some point, these semi-green conservatives are going to have to make a choice--either they can keep accepting hysterical environmentalist claims that the existence of the suburbs is destroying the oceans (yep), or they can start asking some pointed questions. Either they can maintain their sentimental hatred of Wal-Mart and "sprawl," or they can start thinking in terms of what is actually best for all the human beings who live in this country.
Meanwhile, I think we're very blessed to have options.