Re:Steelmanning the NIMBYs
by emodendroket on Wednesday October 03, 2018 @10:11AM
(#18130347)
The modern economy has a much bigger role for cities, and the percentage of the population living in cities or metro areas is historically high. So in fact I do think it is true.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Steelmanning the NIMBYs
by village-idiot on Wednesday October 03, 2018 @10:31AM
(#18130538)
Yes, urbanization is very high right now, although most people underestimate the degree of urbanization in ancient civilizations.
This has less to do with a change in cities than it has to do with the precipitous drop in demand for rural labor of all sorts, imho.
Re:Steelmanning the NIMBYs
by emodendroket on Wednesday October 03, 2018 @11:52AM
(#18131458)
I'm not sure how you tease those two out, as they're kind of mutually reinforcing.
Re:Steelmanning the NIMBYs
by village-idiot on Wednesday October 03, 2018 @04:18PM
(#18134446)
That’s the nature of dynamic systems. You probably cannot tease those apart.
The overall point is that there has always been a drive to push people into cities (otherwise they’d collapse due to mortality rates). The overall rate of urbanism and urban change has fluctuated over the millenia, but it’s hardly new in any meaningful way.
Hence my assertion that anyone living close to a growing metropolis should not be surprised if the density overtakes them.
They might not like it, that’s perfectly reasonable. But expecting things to not change in your area only is actually quite unreasonable in the long run.