What if Europeans designed cities like American cities?

What if Europeans designed cities like American cities?

Attached: 1644549085409.jpg (1242x1548, 251.97K)

heyyyy boston
to be fair, most american cities don't look like boston

>What if Europeans designed cities like American cities?
They'd be less stupid.

Attached: 1644549708663.jpg (683x1024, 87.77K)

Pre-1930s NYC (roads naturally defined over time) vs Post-1930s NYC (grids, big blocks)

Attached: 1644549174336.jpg (644x288, 30.46K)

Europeans don't design anything. Your jew led puppets build the same globohomo architecture we do. The post WWII Europe is in decline ethnically, morally, spiritually, aesthetically, and militarily. Everything you could take pride in died about the same time as Hitler.

I don't agree that big cities, especially in the USA, are terrible places. New York and Los Angeles are prime examples of this.

Attached: 1644549693330.jpg (700x1169, 198.45K)

They probably would have if it was a new continent and they built a massive highway system before any of the cities started booming. We kinda designed around the sprawl, which is a hilarious kick in the balls to poor non-car-owners. I'll still take 90 degree turns over 35 degree turns though lol

> seething retard who has never set foot on European soil

Until the 30s, almost any city was beautiful. The Second World War destroyed a lot of architecture. Thanks to the Communists and Nazis for this.

I don't think that Europeans would design something in the American style, yet we have a different view of architecture, more creative and diverse.

A country like Latvia doesn't even have any cities. You don't have the population density to even have to consider our problems. Riga doesn't have 1 million people. Our ten biggest cities top that. Your next biggest is about a tenth of that. Riga is less relevant than a shit tier city like Columbus Ohio or Oklahoma city.

Was Latvia hit hard by WW2, as far as damage to architecture? Maybe you have it a bit luckier than the average European nation. Some places like Berlin seem to love that shitty postmodern (brutalism?) architecture.

I agree with this, but I myself am against big cities. It is better to live in the suburbs than in a megalopolis, where the average life expectancy is 55-65 years, high crime, high competition, and so on.

Boston is the most European city in the U.S.

Cities are shit, and you are most certainly better off where you are. The pollution, the lack of nature, the crime, and the cost are all things to avoid.

Yes, Latvia practically did not suffer from the bombing of the Nazis and our architecture is more traditional and classical than in Western Europe with their squalid futurism and brutalism. Modern architecture sucks. Is there any beautiful architecture in the USA?

Structurally new orleans is pretty close. Demographically not really

Yes, it is, but the suburb also has its disadvantages, for example, there are few jobs and vacancies, expensive rent, etc. In big cities there is a large range of prices, a lot of different offers for everyone to make a good choice, etc.

The high wages in cities are offset by high rent and other expenses. Some city parking is $35 an hour in Chicago. A nine foot by 18 foot empty space makes more money than several minimum wage employees in a city.