Cool Springs Lands Another

[Kheldane]

healthy, urban, vibrant, and growing core is far more important than some rogue suburb that gets off by thinking the metro area OWES it something. I hate Cool Springs myself. If for no other reason than the pathetic, fake, and insulting architecture and the endless miles of sprawl and stoplights. Oh and it's "winding country roads" piss me off too. LOL!!!!

LOL!! I love it!

I definitely have to give you Kudos for sticking it to CS...I harbor no special fondness for that yuppie enclave.

That being said - Nashville WILL CONTINUE TO LOOSE COMPANIES TO COOL SPRINGS because williamson county has better schools, cheaper land, and richer neighborhoods, and [dare I say it], fewer "colored" people.

CS and most of Williamson Co. has really become a homogenized land of SUV's and White/Republican/Christians. Of course, that is a gross generalization, but probably a generalization that many in the metro area would agree with. You have to understand, the Metro Government is doing all the work to force companies to choose CS over DT. If you have anyone to blame it's not the "greedy" or over-competitive nature of CS, it's the socialist tax&spend practices of metro. Metro makes itself undesirable with continued spending on big-ticket tax-payor-financed projects and higher taxes. I bet a huge % of attendees at Titans games are from Williamson co,,,but has one of them ever payed a dime in metro taxes to pay for the stadium? No, because they're smart - they live in CS and drive in to enjoy the big city conveniences - but when it comes time to pay for them, they leave the big-city taxes to the poor urban dwellers trapped under the thumb of crooked politicians and crookeder nashville businessmen.

So, long-story-short - both cities are run by criminals, but metro puts itself at a disatvantage by making the city high-cost, low quality, ,,,which allows CS to play the high-quality, low-cost card.

[fieldmarshaldj]

and [dare I say it], fewer "colored" people.

Y'know, I once heard a Black comedian comment on the subject of "colored people." He remarked that when Black people get embarrassed or sunburned, they're still Black, but White people turn red. When Black people get cold, they're still Black, but White people turn blue. When Black people get sick to their stomach, they're still Black, but White people turn green. So if Black folks stay the same color, why is it White folks who turn all these different shades aren't called "colored people" ?

You may now resume the serious discussion, already in progress.

[Richard Lawson]

Totally agree. No one could ask for a more reasonable statement than this, without being rude and unreasonable.

One thing, though: you said that as long as people are "willing" to blah blah in the suburbs, the suburbs will continue to exist. You are leaving out an increasingly likely contingency--what happens when people are willing, but not able? Americans need to be a little more honest with themselves and each other about the sustainability of an oil addiction that makes a heroine craving look like a hankerin' for Girl Scout Cookies.

But I still think your post rocks.

Forgive me here, but couple of buddies and I have been into some very good single malt scotch and discussing foreign affairs and philosophy, a very potent combination of topics. Nonetheless, in response to your question I'll address it this way: Americans in general won't do anything unless absolutely backed against a wall. Only then do we become the most creative bunch of people ever. If they are unable, then they will scream for the government to do something. In which case, we then may finally get a viable, extensive commuter rail system.