Looking for sources on the National Housing Act of 1934, several websites (e.g. 1, 2) mentioned it was one of the reasons for the rise of suburbs, along with other regulations.
Does anybody know more about this phenomenon?
Mises Wiki | Economic Resources and Books (search engine)
The rise of the suburbs was due to various factors, the poor living conditions in the cities, the availability of motor vehicles and cheap fuel, the idealistic appeal of country living near the city, ie best of both worlds.
I recommend watching The End of Suburbia, a documentary on peak oil, the first section of the documentary covers the history of the suburbs quite well.
I would examine incentives for people. The biggest one I can think of is the central planning of roadways. These plans effectively subsidized movement to the subburbs by making travel to the cities cheaper. These subsidies reduced the cost of living outside the cities and people moved accordingly.
It will be interesting now that the central planning of highways is beginning to break down as the government debts mount. And with these mouting debts the government will try to charge people for operating their vehicles.
I actually love urban planning, so let me give you a brief history on the rise of suburbia.
The prototypical American city during the Industrial Revolution was very crowded and very dirty. They were hubs of industry. I know that today we think mostly of central business districts like Manhattan, but these cities looked more like the wide, expansive industrial areas that are most epitomized today by parts of Los Angeles (look in Google Maps at Vernon, CA, to see what I mean).
Of course, this does not really answer the question where people lived. Sure, factories provided some housing, but apartments and other high-density dwellings also existed within the city. This close connection in cities between factories and dwellings produced an unsightly and crowded living condition. It should come as no surprise, then, that the rich tended to live outside of the cities to get away from the pollution and the people. Of course, only the rich could afford the commute. The poor, in order to work, had to live in the city.
Then came the trains. Prior to this, the ways of getting around were limited to the horse and buggy and walking. With the trains, people gained great mobility. No longer were people forced to live in extremely high density in the cities. The urban landscape started to gain a more spread out distribution as opposed to the tightly centered model of old.
Suburbia, as we know it, though, could not possibly arise from this situation. Sure, it gave rise to outlying cities, but it was not enough. However, the seed had already been planted. But you still had the problem of transportation to and from the stations. Remember that up to this point all transportation was privately built and maintained. Then came the automobile. With its rise in popularity came the desire for government to control it. Parkways and then highways were built with government money and financed with a gas tax. Finally the modern suburb was born.
Why is government building of these roads such a turning point? Look at what comes along with it. Cars would not need to pay for the pollution that they create. There is no exclusion fee to the road; that is, each car contributes to traffic, yet we do not have to pay for the traffic that we create, hence traffic jams during hours of peak demand.
As for the other aspects, we still have cheap credit and government intrusion into the housing market. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are old institutions. But what may be most important of all is zoning laws. The situation we have today consists of a central city that is built to its bureaucratically dictated maximum, hence new development has to occur elsewhere. These other areas also have strict zoning laws, and so development keeps getting pushed further and further out. Yes, prices are expensive, but people are not offerred a choice because of zoning laws. Without zoning laws, do you think it would even be possible for the type of development that we see today? It's wildly expensive to build like this.
So yes, there are a myriad of regulations and programs that contributed to the rise of suburbia. However, they were coming along even before government artificially stimulated their creation. But the scope to which they developed during the 1950s was unprecedented and would not have been possible without a complete distortion of the transportation industry, cheap credit, and zoning laws that essentially dictated its form.
Yes, I am a huge Dodgers fan.
Anti-state since I learned about the Cuban Revolution and why my dad had to flee the country.
Beer, Guns and Baseball My blog
Tony gives some great info above, but he left out one, very important aspect of American suburbs: Zoning laws. Most American towns and semi-rural areas have master zoning plans which deliniate giant chunks of land to Residential-Industrial-Commercial-Agricultural purposes, with varying subsets and restrictions within this group. If you ever played Sim City, this will be familiar. It came from an outgrowth of the "crowded, dirty city" problem Tony mentioned. You seperate Residential from Industrial areas, so nobody's living next to smokestacks, have Commercial areas also seperate, etc. So this lends itself to having sprawling big-box store complexs with sprawling parking lots, "suburban-sprawl" housing tracts, big industrial centers that are served only by truck traffic, etc.
It's what happens when you let engineers design a city pre-supposing stat-subsidized car use. The traditional city grew up with mixed-use areas. Commercial offices and stores with residential apartments on the upper floors, department stores in the middle of downtown, corner markets in the middle of residential neighborhoods. These are all made impossible by the zoning regulations that prevailed in the US from the 1940's up until pretty much today. Many towns and cities are finally waking up to this problem, promoting "mixed-use" architecture and city plans, which basically mimic the old-school "free-market" designs.
The curse of suburban sprawl is by and large a government creation.
In before someone says "suburbanites are state-lovers".