What's wrong with winner-takes-all for cities? They're not people so it doesn't necessarily matter if they fail, as long at the people who lived in them end up

What's wrong with winner-takes-all for cities? They're not people so it doesn't necessarily matter if they fail, as long at the people who lived in them end up OK. Maybe the country would be more productive and people more employed (thus happy) if most small towns didn't exist and most people lived in higher density cities. Of course some like the quiet places, but there would always be somewhere left for unemployed, retired, or work-from-home people who want that.