4 ms·

We aren't talking about dying here. This isn't analogous to being robbed at knife point. No need to be so dramatic. We are talking about deciding to move somew

We aren't talking about dying here. This isn't analogous to being robbed at knife point. No need to be so dramatic. We are talking about deciding to move somewhere with a higher quality of life. For some, that means better pay in an office and diverse food options a short drive/walk/subway ride away, in exchange for more rent and more people. For others, it means a better view of the night sky and less traffic and cheaper rent in exchange for lower paying work.

giantg2 5y ago
"For some, that means " Exaclty, it varies by person. For some, it is a matter of survival, and can be dramatic with consequences on par with being physically attacked.
- betwixthewires 5y ago
  But that's not the point you've been making, it's not what I've been arguing against. Your point has been "survival in rural areas is untenable and so people have to move to cities for better prospects, therefore moving to the city is not a choice." My point was always "people go where they need to go based on their needs and priorities and survival outside of cities is not any harder than inside them, therefore moving to them is a choice." If anything, survival is easier outside of cities, because cost of living is cheaper and the minimum wage rate is the same. Anyway, we started with you saying you want to move more rural but you can't. But is that true? Could you do it, if you were willing to work a different type of job?
  - giantg2 5y ago
    Nope