Reflections on Paris and London 2018

Two weeks ago the husband and I along with two friends flew out of Washington Dulles to start our 2018 visit to Paris and London.  For me, it was likely the 7th - or more - visit to Paris and like the 5th or sixth visit to London.  My first visits to both cities were back in the 1981-1983 time frame when I was in-house counsel working for an oil company handling various international matters.  Our travel companions, a straight couple, but gay friendly, had never been to either city and were paying our airfare and accommodations in exchange for us planning the trio and serving as tour guides, if you will.  The goal was to show them an amazing time and to also indulge our love for both cities, each of which is a world capital yet so very different in so many ways (both are very LGBT friendly and when we went by London City Hall today, a rainbow flag was flying)

If pushed to choose which city I love more, my vote would go to Paris.  I love the architecture and the way in which the central city has been spared from modern monstrosities or soaring towers which are a total disconnect with the beautiful historic buildings.  London, in contrast is often modern next door to 18th century buildings in part because sections of London were destroyed during the blitz in World War II.  Paris escaped destruction due to the commanding German general's refusal to destroy parts of the city notwithstanding Hitler's orders to do so.

Both cities offer wonderful dining opportunities with London perhaps having more diverse offerings.  But for the nearly 100 miles we walked over the last two weeks - the husband and our travel companions all had apps that measured the amount of their walking - I hate to think how much weight we would have gained.  

In terms of getting around, both cities have amazing mass transits systems that make most American cities look very pathetic at best.  In both cities we bought unlimited 7-day travel cards and we made extensive use of the Metro/Underground systems which make New York City's system look very poorly maintained in comparison.   The train systems for travel outside the cities make Amtrak look positively horrible and the speed at which the trains travel - not counting the Eurostar which is in a class by itself - are amazing.  America could learn a great deal from both the UK and France on how to build remarkable and cost efficient mass transit systems (they could do the same on the issue of healthcare, especially France).

Since this is an LGBT blog, I'd be remiss if I did not mention the local men in each city.  Both being world capitals and deeply involved in the fashion industry, both cities have LOTS of handsome men (and women for female LGBT readers), but the men of Paris, in my opinion are the "hottest" - to quote the husband - and most style conscious.  

If you have never visited either city, I recommend that you do so.  There are economic ways to do so, including looking for discount flights, sharing an apartment with friends, using travel cards as we have to get around freely, and getting a "London Pass" or the "Museum Pass" for Paris which saves a considerable amount of money - the London Pass even got us free rail travel to Windsor Castle.

I'm not sure when I will return to either city, but I suspect I will see both again, especially Paris.  As for blogging tomorrow, we head to the airport in the morning and then need to drive back to Hampton after we arrive in Washington Dulles International.  Post will be sparse at best.

McMansions: An American Embarrassment and Ecological Problem

During my closeted married years I lived in the Great Neck area of Virginia Beach where the main focus on life for many was "how big is your house, how expensive is your car, and what private school do your children attend."  Superficiality seemed to be the norm with far too many of the residents and, when I came out, I discovered how few real friends I truly had.  Many acquaintances, but few real friends.  What I experienced sadly is a reflection of the America's obsession with ever larger homes- McMansions, if you will  -  which produce suburban sprawl and higher than necessary energy consumption.  Much of the development taking place in parts of Tidewater Virginia continues this trend.  A piece in Salon looks at America's wasteful use of land and energy as the McMansion craze continues.  Here are some highlights:

Since the Truman administration, the average American house has inflated with the runaway pace of a hot air balloon, floating from city to suburb to exurb in search of a lot that can hold it.

By 2007, our average crib had grown to 2,521 square feet — 50 percent larger than in 1973, and more than three times the size of the “little boxes” of Levittown, New York, the 1947 Long Island development that marked the dawn of the suburban era.

This surfeit of space is a potent symbol of the American way of life; it speaks to our priorities, our prosperity and our tendency to take more than we need. But the superlative size of our houses isn’t just a foam finger America can hold up to the world. It’s correlated with land use patterns and population density, which in turn determine the environmental impact and personal health of communities, and whether they can support a diverse range of businesses, facilities and transportation choices. It’s no coincidence that a modern American suburb like Weston, Florida, has just one-third the population density of Levittown.

[L]ast year, the average size of new American houses reached an all-time high of 2,679 square feet. The increase in space per person has been even more dramatic. Between 1973 and 2013, the average American household shrank from 3.01 to 2.54 persons; new homes give Americans more than 1,000 square feet per family member, on average. That’s roughly twice as much space as we had in 1973.

American homes dwarf those in nearly every other country on Earth. Our new houses are twice the size of those in Germany, and you could fit three new U.K. houses inside one of ours. (For what it’s worth, the houses in the U.K. are rather cramped.) Even in spacious Canada, our neighbors are building homes three-quarters the size of their U.S. equivalents. Only Australia, which has the lowest population density in the world after Mongolia and Namibia, can rival the U.S.A. for big houses.

During most of the early-aughts housing boom, too, more than four of five new units were single-family homes. But that huge discrepancy has been vanquished by a surge in apartment construction. These days, the rate of new starts in multi-family buildings has been hovering, nationwide, near 40 percent — a level not seen in decades.

That raises a number of questions. Are these new residents trading the space of suburbia for the vibrancy of a city? Are they downsizing their living quarters to spend money on other things? Or can they simply not afford to rent a bigger apartment or purchase a house?

Not surprisingly, as communities sprawl, auto use soars and mass transit becomes untenable. 

The GOP War Against the Nation's Infrastructure

In order to give tax breaks to the wealthy, today's Republicans are willing to slash programs for the poor and needy even as billions of dollars continue to be squandered in the fool's errand wars launched by Chimperator George W. Bush and Emperor Palpatine Cheney.  But there is another victim of the Republican Party's reverse Robin Hood agenda: the nation's crumbling infrastructure.  Here in Virginia the highway system is becoming increasingly inadequate and in Hampton Roads the transportation is so stressed at rush hour that the situation is harming economic growth.  But will the Virginia GOP vote to increase the gasoline tax which hasn't been raise in a quarter of a century?  Of course not.  They would rather abdicate responsibility and enter into "public-private" arrangements where private interest will rape Virginians with tolls and fees with little accountability to taxpayers.  A piece in the New York Times looks at this nationwide problem of our crumbling infrastructure.  Just imagine what could have been accomplished if billions and billions of dollars had not been squandered in Iraq and Afghanistan.  Here are column excerpts:

Across the coasts of New York and New Jersey, hundreds of millions of gallons of raw and partially treated sewage are spilling into waterways and the ocean. The immediate cause is equipment damage from Hurricane Sandy, but as Michael Schwirtz recently reported in The Times, aging plants like one in Nassau County on Long Island were leaking long before the storm, flooding neighborhood streets with sewage during downpours.

There are thousands of faltering sewage plants like these across the country, staffed by operators who dread rainy days. Civil engineers in every state are monitoring ominous cracks in roads and bridges that carry freight and school buses. And millions of transit commuters are awaiting new equipment and long-deferred maintenance on systems that are reliable only when the sun is shining. 

The need for investment in public works, never more urgent, has become a casualty of Washington’s ideological wars. Republicans were once reliable partners in this kind of necessary spending. But since President Obama spent about 12 percent of the 2009 stimulus on transportation, energy and other infrastructure programs, Republicans have made it a policy to demonize these kinds of investments. 

When the president asked recently for a modest $50 billion for transportation improvements in the “fiscal cliff” talks, Republicans literally laughed out loud. There will be no stimulus in any deal, said Representative Bill Shuster of Pennsylvania, the incoming chairman of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.

Big government construction projects put people to work, and those new jobs have enormous ripple effects — $1.44 in benefits for every government dollar spent on public works. An infrastructure bank for energy and water projects, started with $10 billion in government seed money, could leverage hundreds of billions in private investments. 

But the biggest reason to spend money on these projects is that they are desperately needed in every city and state. Around the country, there are 70,000 structurally deficient bridges; one of them, in southern New Jersey, collapsed under a train last week, sending tank cars full of flammable gas into a creek. There are 4,000 dams in need of repair, and the electrical grid in this supposedly advanced country ranks 32nd in the world in reliability, behind Slovenia’s. Those Republicans who deride this investment as worthless stimulus might want to explain to freezing homeowners why it is too expensive to bury fragile power lines.

Most estimates put the cost of basic repairs at more than $2 trillion, and that does not even include long-range upgrades to the electrical grid, storm protection and mass transit.  Around the country, ridership on transit has grown significantly since the 1990s, but federal investments have fallen far short. The Transportation Department says that if $18 billion were spent every year — 40 percent more than is being spent now — transit systems might get to a state of good repair by 2028.

The NextGen satellite program desperately needed to replace the nation’s clogged air traffic control system will cost at least $30 billion, but much of that money is likely to be cut by the automatic sequester of spending put in place by Republicans last year. This investment will ultimately save the airline industry vast amounts now lost to delays and excess fuel consumption, but like so many other important projects, it is being eroded in the blind ideological rush to cut everything. As bridges fall, subway riders are stranded and flight delays pile up, the cost of this shortsightedness will continue to mount.