Category Archives: Sociology

Papal visits and large crowds

Posted on by

Pope Francis visited East Timor earlier this week and many people came out to see him:

Photo by brokenadmiral_ on Pexels.com

opes are popular. So much so that nearly half the population of East Timor gathered Tuesday in a seaside park for Pope Francis’ final Mass in the small Southeast Asian country whose people are deeply Catholic…

East Timor, also known as Timor-Leste, has been overwhelmingly Catholic ever since Portuguese explorers first arrived in the early 1500s and some 97% of the population today is Catholic. They turned out in droves to welcome the first pope to visit them since their independence in 2002, on the same field where St. John Paul II prayed in 1989 during the nation’s fight to separate from Indonesia.

Here is how this crowd compares to other crowds for papal visits:

Other papal Masses have drawn millions of people in more populous countries, such as the Philippines, Brazil and Poland. But the estimated crowd of 600,000 people in East Timor was believed to represent the biggest turnout for a papal event ever in terms of the proportion of the population…

While the East Timor gathering stands out, experts caution against relying on crowd counts that cannot be independently verified. The Vatican communicates crowd estimates that come from local organizers — who have an interest in overestimating the popularity of the head of the Roman Catholic Church.

Crowd counting can be a tricky process. Does it get more difficult if it is a religious crowd as opposed to another kind of crowd?

More broadly, is the experience of a religious large crowd different? It is a unique experience to be crowds of hundreds of thousands of people or more. It does not happen often. The crowd can have a collective experience that is hard for individuals to have on their own. Such a crowd can help produce change or sentiment.

Seeing a steam locomotive roll through suburbs created by such vehicles

Posted on by

At least a few suburbs in the Chicago area and outside cities throughout the United States owe their founding to early railroad lines that provided quick access to the bi city and other points beyond. So when a large steam locomotive passed along the same suburban tracks in 2024, at least a few people took note:

With a shiny yellow-and-gray streamlined passenger train in tow, the Union Pacific “Big Boy” No. 4014 steam locomotive rolled through the western suburbs Monday morning to the delight of railroad enthusiasts and casual observers alike.

Roughly two hundred years ago, steam locomotives opened up all kinds of possibilities. One opportunity involved the possibility of larger and further-flung suburbs: a resident outside could travel quickly in and out of the big city. It no longer took a day or more to use horses or a carriage. No more need to travel a long distance over poor roads. Large amounts of freight could be shipped overland from the interior to big cities.

The early railroad lines tended to connect important cities and locations to each other. Along these lines, residents gathered near stations. Lots were developed. Businesses moved there. Churches opened. Houses were built. Communities grew. Regular train service emerged.

Eventually, these railroad lines were dwarfed in importance by cars, trucks, roads, and highways. Many of the lines still exist but more people drive. Much suburban development since World War Two has happened between railroad lines as cars offered access to more land.

Amid the regular clatter of passenger and freight trains through suburbia, an occasional steam locomotive with a loud whistle and billowing smoke provides a reminder of an older era. Yet, that older era helped give rise to the automobile dominated suburbia of today.

When American big cities devote much of their land to single-family homes

Posted on by

The big city in the United States is dense. It has tall buildings and busy streets. There are plenty of apartments and mixed-use structures. They look and feel different than suburbs, small towns, and rural areas.

Photo by Phu Nguyen on Pexels.com

But even American cities have lots of single-family homes. Chicago, for example, has a lot of land devoted to single-family homes:

More than 40% of the city is zoned for single-family housing…

This figure might even be higher in other cities, particularly sprawling ones.

What might this figure mean? Some thoughts:

  1. Denser populations can fit into less space. But the amount of space given to one kind of land use, homes in this case, still matters.
  2. These neighborhoods and residents are going to get at least some attention and representation. Their interests might converge and diverge in important ways from interests of other locations and residents in big cities.
  3. This fits with an American emphasis on single-family homes, even if these homes happen to be in cities.
  4. Suburbs are in between cities and more rural areas. Are city neighborhoods of single-family homes often in between denser populations and suburbs? Do these city places feel more like suburbs or like life in different densities in the big city?

Another way to think about this percentage: even the places that Americans tend not to associate with houses and the lives that go with them have lots. of single-family homes.

Do presidential elections affect the housing market?

Posted on by

With the upcoming November elections, some in the housing market are waiting to see what happens:

Photo by Guilherme Rossi on Pexels.com

Fall is traditionally a slower time for home sales, but this year, buyers seem extra wary. Uncertainty over the presidential election, questions over the direction of the U.S. economy, and confusion about new rules for home-buying brought on by the National Association of Realtors legal settlement have some buyers hitting the brakes on what could potentially be the biggest purchase they will ever make. Not to mention the possibility of a Federal Reserve interest-rate cut on the horizon.

Is the lack of activity really about the elections? A few other data points:

Goshorn explained that he often hears people say they “just want to see how the election goes” and are reluctant because they “don’t know what’s going to happen.” But he noted that evidence points to election cycles having little effect on the housing market. “Clearly, the numbers don’t lie: Nine out of 11 election cycles, existing-home sales have gone up. Seven out of 8 times, median home prices have gone up,” he said.

Some buyers say they’ll only buy a home “if their candidate wins,” Matthew Purdy, a Colorado-based real-estate agent, said in a Redfin blog post. “Others are waiting because they feel the economy and housing market are shaky, and hope it will improve after the election.”

Though presidents have little direct control over home prices, housing affordability is the issue that will influence younger voters’ candidate choice the most in the 2024 presidential election, according to a recent survey…

Research is mixed on whether consumers actually pull back on spending money on big-ticket items in the leadup to a presidential election…

Even though some buyers have expressed hesitation to purchase homes due to the political climate, the data doesn’t back up the anecdotes, a study by housing consultancy group John Burns Research & Consulting found.

It sounds like there is little effect when considering historical patterns and studies.

But it is an interesting talking point amid other pressures in the housing market. Lots of people might want market conditions to be different. And there is a chance for candidates to respond to the concerns people have.

I know this is too much to ask but what if there was an upcoming debate or set of back and forths between the candidates regarding housing. The article briefly mentions that the candidates have made some statement about improvements for the housing market. Can we get more details and go beyond soundbites that attempt to appeal to parts of the electorate? How much do their plans differ? Where do they see room for improvement or have a vision for sustainable change? Because housing and where people can live is so important for so many other outcomes, a focused discussion or debate about housing could touch on all sorts of important topics.

Who won with a massive tax break affecting a major corporation and a Chicago suburb?

Posted on by

This story is from 2020 but I found it interesting: what happened when the State of Illinois gave Sears large amounts of money to relocate to suburban Hoffman Estates? From ProPublica and the Daily Herald in 2020:

Photo by Airam Dato-on on Pexels.com

The deal cemented that day would permanently change Illinois, as politicians embraced the use of taxpayer funds to stop a growing exodus of jobs from the state. Since 1989, state and local officials have given $5.3 billion in government incentives to corporations, according to Good Jobs First, a non profit which compiles data on tax deals.

In Sears’ case, state and local officials awarded the company subsidies and tax deals worth more than $536 million over the past three decades — the largest package of governmental incentives ever given to a single company in Illinois.

The tax breaks and credits would transform Hoffman Estates, then a suburb of 45,000 that lay among cornfields 30 miles northwest of Chicago. Sears worked with state and local politicians to build a sprawling corporate headquarters, new roads, tollway interchanges and other infrastructure in the growing village.

Was it a “success”?

ProPublica and the Daily Herald wanted to know whether the investment paid off. Where has the deal succeeded? Where has it failed? What did Illinois and Hoffman Estates taxpayers get for the half billion dollars awarded to Sears?

The review of the Sears deal shows that 30 years of spending public money on private interests failed to deliver the economic bonanza envisioned by corporate, state and local officials.

Reading through the report, it seems that a few parties might claim victory decades later. Local officials attracted a major corporation and jobs. Illinois officials could claim they saved jobs and promoted economic development. And Sears got lots of money (even if the company’s long-term trajectory was not good).

Was it worth more $536 million? Could the money have been better invested elsewhere? Would the story be any different if Sears went to a different community or a different state and got similar amounts of money?

Offering these kinds of incentives is now common across American communities. It may have been Sears in the late 1980s but more recently it was Amazon and a possible second headquarters and Foxconn and Samsung and many others. If communities do not participate, they will “lose out” as other places claim a victory.

Do local residents win in the long run? How do the fates of the communities who got the spoils versus those who did not and/or those who did not compete? Is this the only way to play the game to lead to flourishing suburbs and metropolitan areas?

Unique noise features in populated areas

Posted on by

People might generally think of cities as noisy. Amid this volume level, there can be unique noise phenomena in cities and populated areas. Here are two examples, starting with temperature inversion layers:

Photo by Anthony ud83dude42 on Pexels.com

Temperature inversion layers, like the one happening the night Tamblyn heard Billy Joel from her backyard, occur when cool air gets trapped underneath a layer of warm air.

The warm air prevents the cool air from rising, along with smog and sound. The sound waves bend away from the inversion layer and back to the ground, bouncing across further distances.

This is more likely to happen during the fall season, as well as during certain times of day.

The second example involves different kinds of surfaces:

Skyscrapers lining the street can amplify city sounds, according to acoustic consultant Scott Pfeiffer.

That’s because sound waves easily reflect off rigid, hard surfaces, like glass and brick, Pfeiffer said. Sounds bounce back and forth like the two sides of the street are playing tennis.

The end result is a sound “canyon,” which often creates an echo…

Trees, grass and other plant life act as natural absorbers and deflectors of sound.

Three thoughts in response:

  1. Does public noise matter less in an era where lots of people use AirPods and other headphones? People have used headphones for decades but the noise-cancelling features of today’s devices plus their ubiquity might mean more people are in their own soundscapes.
  2. If cities are greener in the future, particularly with more plants and greenery among the buildings, does this mean they would be quieter? Having fewer motorized vehicles could also help.
  3. It is common to think of cities in terms of neighborhoods or scenes. These are often defined with physical boundaries. Do sound boundaries roughly match these boundaries or are there different sonic neighborhoods in places?

Can you have “high-end, custom homes” that are within a few feet of the neighbors?

Posted on by

A new proposed subdivision in one Chicago suburb will have “custom, high-end homes.” But the image provided suggests these homes will be right next to their neighbors. Do these things go together?

https://www.dailyherald.com/20240903/news/custom-home-developer-asks-lombard-to-annex-site/

A description of “high-end” and “custom” plus looking at the rendering suggests these will be pricey homes. To have this square footage with a garage in a new single-family home build in an older suburb will cost buyers a good amount.

But the homes are so close to each other! Americans like single-family homes in the suburbs but they also like a little space. They like a lawn and an approximation of nature. They like some privacy and an ability to do what they want with their property.

The demand will be there for these homes, yards or not. Housing supply is limited. Some buyers want to pay for less yard space. The new spacious interior with features will outweigh other downsides. If plenty of Americans prefer private interior spaces, these homes will offer that. Like many in the suburbs, people can drive into their garage, close the door, and do their thing inside with little interaction with neighbors or the community.

I also imagine there are a good number of people in the United States who would look at the drawing above and not have any interest due to the lack of space around each house. These are denser suburban homes that do not appeal to everyone.

The new 10-to-4 office hours and commuting patterns

Posted on by

When rush hour is continues to change:

Photo by Pixabay on Pexels.com

The traditional American 9-to-5 has shifted to 10-to-4, according to the 2023 Global Traffic Scorecard released in June by INRIX Inc., a traffic-data analysis firm.

“There is less of a morning commute, less of an evening commute and much more afternoon activity,” said Bob Pishue, a transportation analyst and author of the report. “This is more of the new normal.”

Now, there is a “midday rush hour,” the INRIX report found, with almost as many trips to and from the office being made at noon as there are at 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.

Also, commuters have all but given up on public transportation. Ridership sank during the pandemic, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis data shows, and never fully recovered.

The rush hour increasingly seems to be “traffic all the time!”

Since this has now been going on for a few years and also includes changes to truck use and ride sharing, what are cities and regions doing differently? What incentives do drivers and organizations have to choose other than drive by themselves when they want?

There does seem to be some possible good will to change traffic patterns when there are major issues, like significant highway repairs or the Olympics. When does regular traffic become a large enough issue that people start acting together?

Like I asked yesterday, are there cities and regions that do a better job at this than others?

What US metro areas do suburb to suburb mass transit well?

Posted on by

Public hearings about mass transit consolidation in the Chicago region highlight a persistent issue: where is the mass transit to serve all the people who commute suburb to suburb?

Photo by Jou00e3o Jesus on Pexels.com

“Right now, our transit system reflects an old design,” DuPage County Board Chair Deb Conroy testified in Naperville. “One that saw commuting as merely bedroom communities serving downtown workplaces.”

“All suburban residents deserve the same level and access to and from Naperville to Rosemont or from Oak Park to the Morton Arboretum in Lisle.”

College of DuPage student Rowan Julian experienced that disconnect trying to get from Wheaton to Batavia to see a friend, a 20-minute car trip. She wanted to use public transit but found it could take up to one hour and 40 minutes.

“For me I felt like I had no choice … so I chose to take my car,” she said.

Chicago, like many older metro areas, has a hub-and-spoke model where the train lines feed the center of the city. This fit a particular era when there was a mass of jobs and economic activity in the center of cities.

Today, metropolitan regions are sprawling and many commuters do not need to go to the big city for work: there are all sorts of jobs all throughout the region. This presents particular challenges for mass transit. Buses can use existing roadways but tend to be slower than cars. Trains can connect nodes but then there needs to be additional service from the train stations. Access via walking or biking might be theoretically possible in some suburban areas but it is often dangerous. Communities and the region can encourage more development around existing transit nodes. And Americans often seem to like driving because of the individual freedom it offers and go when they want and where they want.

What American regions do this well? Could be older regions or newer regions. Who has a model that other regions can emulate? How can regions build this capacity and pay for it? When much of the money is funneled to maintaining existing roads and building new ones, how can suburban places find resources for mass transit?

Searching for the best home for the apocalypse

Posted on by

How many American homes would survive the end times? You can search for homes now that might have a better chance of surviving a major crisis.

Photo by Erik Mclean on Pexels.com

One critique of mass produced postwar homes is that they would not stand the test of time. They were not built well. They were constructed quickly and lacked quality.

Many of them are still standing. Many of them have been improved over time with renovations, additions, and changes. But how many would survive a global pandemic or major natural disaster or the explosion of a nuclear device in the big city 25 miles away?

Part of the issue would be how close the homes are to the issue at hand. A second is whether the people living there can access resources to keep the home maintained. A third concern is whether people can keep living in the home or if they must flee elsewhere; a home with no one there will suffer over time.

If someone has the money and the fears (or foresight?) to buy a home that prepares them for a period of crisis, now is the time to purchase before the properties get snapped up or they become more expensive. The rest of the residents of the United States will have to wait for the mass produced version…