2 ms·

False dichotomy. You can close all the city's nightclubs and you wouldn't have a city with only housing. Only a very small subset of people living in the city

by grive 8y ago

False dichotomy. You can close all the city's nightclubs and you wouldn't have a city with only housing. Only a very small subset of people living in the city will use nightclubs. It is reasonable that they are not given priority over things essential to living (housing, accomodations, transport, public services, etc..).

Arbalest 8y ago
Agreed. Lets get some stats of the distribution of jobs and average commute times and see how that comes out then vs now. Edit: Also worth noting is the daylife, shall we say. That is, cafes and the like are a lot more popular than they used to be.
imgabe 8y ago
Nightclubs are one thing. I said "a" reason, not "the" reason. People don't go to the expense and trouble of living in cities because they have the bare essentials of keeping yourself alive. That is available in any town. People move to the city because of things to do which includes nightclubs, restaurants, museums, theater, sports venues, cultural events, etc. If all you want is a bunch of houses and roads connecting them and basic public services, you can get that for a fraction of the price in the suburbs.
- Truskova 8y ago
  that's a good point. But also people move because of jobs, higher salaries and adequate living conditions (including housing cost). The last one can't be said about Dublin. Lots of friends of mine moved back to their countries even though wages were lower, but considering prices for food, entertainment and rent at the end of the month they have more money in the pocket.
- grive 8y ago
  Okay > People move to the city because of things to do which includes nightclubs, restaurants, museums, theater, sports venues, cultural events, etc. Now remove nightclubs from this list, and you still get a list of attractive reasons to settle in a city. You don't have to infringe on the night of others to still have an enjoyable city. To repeat myself: you could close all the nightclubs in a city and you would still have plenty to live for there.

by grive 8y ago

Arbalest 8y ago

Agreed. Lets get some stats of the distribution of jobs and average commute times and see how that comes out then vs now. Edit: Also worth noting is the daylife, shall we say. That is, cafes and the like are a lot more popular than they used to be.

imgabe 8y ago

Nightclubs are one thing. I said "a" reason, not "the" reason. People don't go to the expense and trouble of living in cities because they have the bare essentials of keeping yourself alive. That is available in any town. People move to the city because of things to do which includes nightclubs, restaurants, museums, theater, sports venues, cultural events, etc. If all you want is a bunch of houses and roads connecting them and basic public services, you can get that for a fraction of the price in the suburbs.

Truskova 8y ago
that's a good point. But also people move because of jobs, higher salaries and adequate living conditions (including housing cost). The last one can't be said about Dublin. Lots of friends of mine moved back to their countries even though wages were lower, but considering prices for food, entertainment and rent at the end of the month they have more money in the pocket.
grive 8y ago
Okay > People move to the city because of things to do which includes nightclubs, restaurants, museums, theater, sports venues, cultural events, etc. Now remove nightclubs from this list, and you still get a list of attractive reasons to settle in a city. You don't have to infringe on the night of others to still have an enjoyable city. To repeat myself: you could close all the nightclubs in a city and you would still have plenty to live for there.