Kind of amazing that people still need to be convinced to wear helmets while riding.

You'd have a hard time convincing me to ride without one.

https://zxing.org/w/decode.jspx

If on desktop

It's not an issue of the style of house; it's an issue of the lot square footage allocated to a single house (i.e. dwelling units per acre).

Think of it like this: if you've got a single family house on a square 1-acre lot, that's a little over 200 feet on each side. Assuming it's not a corner lot and you've got a neighbor across the street, your tax dollars basically need to pay to maintain 100' of street, water and sewer pipes, etc. plus the cost per mile of city vehicles driving past it. (Plus some amount related to the depth of the yard and its effect on the length of other roads on other sides of the block, but let's ignore that for simplicity.)

In comparison, if it were 4 1/4-acre lots instead (with 50' of street frontage each), each family would only be responsible for 25' worth of infrastructure. Or if it were a 10-unit multifamily building on that lot, each family would only need to pay for 10'.

Unfortunately, because tax is based on property value and not street frontage and value doesn't scale linearly like that, what ends up happening is that the city loses money on the large-lot single-family, and those people (who are already generally some of the richest since they can afford large lots) end up getting subsidized by the (poorest) people who take up the least amount of space.

It's both unjust and a perverse incentive to consume more space than you need.

Nice to look at is subjective. I find them ugly, but ofcourse that is rooted in knowing that they're basically dead land that just looks green. Just like tree plantations aren't as pretty as a forest. What I find prettier is chaotic growth that is mostly left to it's own.

Smell, again subjective, I find the varried smell much more pleasant. But the smell is always superceded by the nearby dairy farm anyways in my case, as it is for my neighbours with their grass yards

"Pleasant to use" you mean easy for kids to play on? Can't argue with that if you have kids. I don't and I enjoy watching my chaotic yard used more by birds and insects. , knowing that there's at least more life in there.

And they were spraying all kinds of nasty shit on grass that isn't native to make it look pretty?

Why is mowing the issue? If you just leave it be it grows too tall.

Depends on the livestock. Some are top grazers like cows and other eat all the way to the base like sheep (this one can kill the grass)

I don't care about lawns, what I care about is the bad argument claiming that just because things were done a certain way 300 years ago means that they're necessarily bad.

Also beds back then were made of straw and rope

Mattresses, maybe. Beds were beds. The basic design of beds hasn't changed.

The point is that some things haven't changed in centuries because they do the job just fine. So, the argument that "this is the way it was 300 years ago, therefore it's bad" is a shitty argument.