• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    221 year ago

    Really the only argument against tight packed cities is “I don’t like people”. That shouldn’t really be a priority.

    There’s also: “I want to have nature around me” - and there’s “I have pets that need to go out” - and there’s “In a big city it can be dirty, smelly and loud” and “People neglected by society hang around big cities” and “Big real estate firms crank up housing prizes”.

    What we really need is better city planning, to reduce traffic & roads, and make areas pedestrian only - at that point, quality of life in a city improves. Also, we need to kill big real estate corps and regulate housing prizes. And there needs to be a will in politics to actually address social issues, including but not limited to violent crimes.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      111 year ago

      I think not having sprawling cities means you can have nature nearby a lot moreso than in endless suburbia though. Unless you count lawns as nature.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        01 year ago

        Nearby is relative to the quality of public transportation though, as not everyone can afford a car, and even if they can, it kills the environment and quality of living in the city to have traffic. And public transportation infrastructure is sadly still next to non-existent in many metropolitan areas in the world.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          71 year ago

          Public transport is cheaper too when cities are not sprawling. We are talking about the benefits new dense development, where public transport should be a core consideration and not an afterthought.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      81 year ago

      Don’t forget “We’ve had a pandemic going for over 3 years, I’d like to not be around a bunch of sneezing and coughing people” at this point, particularly because public transit is objectively better for cities than driving, but also a better place to catch COVID than your car.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      51 year ago

      You are right, this is of course argumented from an ideal perspective. Building and managing cities like they are now, just denser, wouldn’t work.

      In an utopian world that really put the environment first there would be no greedy investors and greedy landlords, no one would feel left behind and instead of using farms we’d have some kind of ultra efficient vertical hydroponics stuff going on.

      It would be amazing having sci-fi mega cities, perhaps connected via underground railroads and between them just nature undisturbed. It feels like we are so close from a technological standpoint to make that happen. At least it’s not completely unimaginable.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        51 year ago

        It would be amazing having sci-fi mega cities, perhaps connected via underground railroads and between them just nature undisturbed. It feels like we are so close from a technological standpoint to make that happen.

        I wholeheartedly agree. And I believe we have everything needed to make that happen - but if everyone has good living conditions, that just isn’t profitable / exploitable for the corporate world. Happy people means it’s harder / impossible to scare them or make them angry at some perceived threat / enemy, and exploit their dividedness. All megacorporations without exception and a lot of mid- to large size businesses thrive on exploiting workers who are too divided to unite and demand a fair share of work and profits and acceptable working conditions.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        21 year ago

        Ain’t nobody commuting from a high rise to the farm field where that city gets its food.