4 ms·

It is obvious that large cities exist for a reason. But it is also obvious that some people can cope with their limitations much better than others. Think of yo

It is obvious that large cities exist for a reason. But it is also obvious that some people can cope with their limitations much better than others. Think of young, able, independent, wealthy adults vs. families, for instance. Families in general do much better in smaller communities, because they offer more space and less traffic (up to a point, though because schools etc. should preferably be in walking distance). That being said, cities might offer communities thag provide for special needs whereas towns and villages tend to be more streamlined. Living with kids is such a streamlined thing.

howlgarnish 6y ago
"Cope with their limitations"? Many people actively enjoy living in busy cities, and I would not voluntarily move to a place that's not Alpha- or higher on this list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Globalization_and_World_Cities_Research_Network https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Globalization_and_World_Cities...
- segfaultbuserr 6y ago
  Choeger meant that some people are more comfortable living in a busy city than others (alternatively, some people cope with the side-effects of busy cities better than others), choeger didn't deny that cities are advantageous for certain activities and people. I think it's just a semantic issue and there's no real disagreement here.
- StanislavPetrov 6y ago
  And many people despise living in cities! As a New Yorker who worked in NYC for many years, I would not voluntarily move to any city for any reason.
mymythisisthis 6y ago
The case can be made that cities produce well rounded children, that mature faster. Cities expose children to all sorts situations, and people, that they learn to handle. Children in cities are also more independent able to go on the bus, bicycle to where every they want. There are more resources for children, such as museums, pools. It's harder to raise a child in a small city. You always have to drive them somewhere, and become a hoovering babysitter. They can't see their friends, unless driven. They are bussed to school, and home. Meaning that they don't get extra-curricular activities. Some studies, however, have shown that medium sized cities are best. 50K people, because a child will get special attention from a teacher/mentor. Many good athletes come from medium sized cities. But, it may be hard for some kids to find a teacher that holds their interest. For example a kid that likes astronomy.
Jeff_Brown 6y ago
Los Angeles is a megacity with lots of space. It's nothing like Manhattan; most of the space is taken up by single-story houses with yards. In fact, most of New York is not like Manhattan, either -- but its buildings are packed much more densely than LA's.

howlgarnish 6y ago

"Cope with their limitations"? Many people actively enjoy living in busy cities, and I would not voluntarily move to a place that's not Alpha- or higher on this list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Globalization_and_World_Cities_Research_Network https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Globalization_and_World_Cities...

segfaultbuserr 6y ago
Choeger meant that some people are more comfortable living in a busy city than others (alternatively, some people cope with the side-effects of busy cities better than others), choeger didn't deny that cities are advantageous for certain activities and people. I think it's just a semantic issue and there's no real disagreement here.
StanislavPetrov 6y ago
And many people despise living in cities! As a New Yorker who worked in NYC for many years, I would not voluntarily move to any city for any reason.

mymythisisthis 6y ago

The case can be made that cities produce well rounded children, that mature faster. Cities expose children to all sorts situations, and people, that they learn to handle. Children in cities are also more independent able to go on the bus, bicycle to where every they want. There are more resources for children, such as museums, pools. It's harder to raise a child in a small city. You always have to drive them somewhere, and become a hoovering babysitter. They can't see their friends, unless driven. They are bussed to school, and home. Meaning that they don't get extra-curricular activities. Some studies, however, have shown that medium sized cities are best. 50K people, because a child will get special attention from a teacher/mentor. Many good athletes come from medium sized cities. But, it may be hard for some kids to find a teacher that holds their interest. For example a kid that likes astronomy.

Jeff_Brown 6y ago

Los Angeles is a megacity with lots of space. It's nothing like Manhattan; most of the space is taken up by single-story houses with yards. In fact, most of New York is not like Manhattan, either -- but its buildings are packed much more densely than LA's.