3 ms·

Is this the key criteria to optimize for?

• kingkongreveng_ 17y ago
  You are missing the general point about quality of life and cost of living. Also, I might add, about income inequality. Conveniently located housing or easy access to nature is now more something for the rich where-as it used to be for everyone.
  • petercooper 17y ago
    Only in relatively small areas that have other desirable properties - such as low crime, diverse populations, entertainment or culture.. such as swathes of western Europe, and blotches across the US with a focus on the coasts. Housing is cheap and conveniently located for purpose in, say, Nebraska - and even the poor have easy access to nature. Same applies to the majority of the Canada, Africa, or Asia land masses.
    • kingkongreveng_ 17y ago
      I'm not sure what convenient means to you, but I'm thinking it means near jobs and culture.
      • petercooper 17y ago
        The only places that there are jobs and "culture" are within an hour of major metropolitan centers? Where there are no jobs (or means of production), there are no people. There are plenty of people conducting business and making livings even in deepest Nebraska, Wyoming, Africa, Canada, or wherever. You seem to be attaching special importance to the types of jobs and "culture" that massive congregations of people produce, while complaining that the number of people in those locations is too high ;-)