Originally Posted by
jon c.
Seems to me this is really more about opportunity costs than freedom. At least in the conventional sense of the term. When we make a choice, we pay a price for that choice in limiting or eliminating other choices. I choose to live where I do. I make that choice freely. It does deprive me of ready access to public transportation and puts me too far out to make bike commuting practical for me. But you can't really call this an impediment to freedom as my freedom is exercised in making the choice to live where I do. I am equally free to move close to work, or close to restaurants and shopping if I desire. In doing so, I would give up enjoying the lifestyle I currently live. It would in the same sense be an impediment to my freedom to fully enjoy the beauty of a natural setting. Although our needs, wants, and desires are influenced by our culture, there is no cultural mandate that I make one choice or another. Every choice comes with costs, regardless of one's culture.
...but what if the way of living you found is THE way of living and you want everyone else to live the same way? I mean, sure, the place you live is fine, but that 5 sq miles of urban area 300 miles from you could by slightly different in order to bike or take a bus from a residential street to the grocery store a small bit easier. Granted we'll have to tear down some stores and homes and rip up the existing streets, but it will be slightly better, in my opinion, when we're done! Isn't that what it's all about anyway?