4 ms·
That's because there aren't enough Manhattans. A similar situation plays out in cities like London - a ton of people move out to raise families; historically i
by esotericn 7y ago
That's because there aren't enough Manhattans.
A similar situation plays out in cities like London - a ton of people move out to raise families; historically it's been possible for the middle class to have children and live a few zones out, but it's getting much harder for anyone without inheritance.
The problem is that there are very few cities that aren't either tiny, or endless car based sprawl.
- sigstoat 7y ago> A similar situation plays out in cities like London - a ton of people move out to raise families; historically it's been possible for the middle class to have children and live a few zones out, but it's getting much harder for anyone without inheritance. > The problem is that there are very few cities that aren't either tiny, or endless car based sprawl. not to be trite, but isn't "very few cities that aren't ... tiny" sort of definitional? england only has the population for 6 greater londons, if you crammed them all together. would spreading the population across six of them bring prices down enough for everyone to have the nice flat they want? how long would that remain the case?