Originally it was economic incentives, there was far more opportunities for independent wealth and freedom from generational poverty. Now it’s just retarded people who have become the generational poverty, which is why flight from liberal hellholes has skyrocketed.
They were willing to be crowded because it used to allow greater opportunities. Economic being the primary, which is why the “starving artist” trope only exists in massive Metropolitan areas, when a large source of capital is available in an area then people will flock to it. Think of it like how Californian companies are fleeing to Texas cities, Californian cities are larger but the government has made capital access minimal, so the businesses move to areas where there is more capital to access. This is also why corporations moved “headquarters” to poor countries who offer cheaper accommodations. A prostitute could make more money than most skilled labor jobs in a city simply because the access to capital is greater.
And that's where the seeds of the city's later corruption and decline starts, right when the thing seems the healthiest. It isn't just legit businessmen that contribute positive things that are attracted to a growing boom town.
The Plague didn't stop excess farm boys from moving into the cities for all the job opportunities and cheap housing that the disease opened up for the survivors.
Anyway, pretty much any now-big, squalid city started out as a "boom town".
Exactly this. They're herd animals. The idea of existing outside of the supposed safety of the herd frightens them.
The irony, of course, is that cities are objectively the least safe places to be on the planet, whether because of crime, disease, their high value as military targets, or how easily disrupted their fragile parasitic ecosystem is by a single blocked road.
There was a very short time in my life I thought about it, back then I lived closer to the city than I do now. One big pro when you do live in a city is driving can be a brutal and irritating experience. So the allure of being able to walk places isn't bad. Particularly back then I was having to commute 5 days a week, burning away many hours in a car in traffic is a horrible way to start and end every day.
I've since changed jobs and I was working from home the majority of the time even before Covid world. So I moved out to the fringe suburban areas. When I did have to go to the office, it was a long way but it's wasn't that common and now it's almost not at all. It's so much better being further out from all that mess, just to be able to go about daily business without dealing with the driving alone. I think in hindsight if I had ended up in an actual dense urban condo I would have not lasted a year. No space to work on projects, build things, etc along with being surrounded by leftists would have been a total no-go.
I don't get it myself. I look forward to moving to a nice small countryside location instead of the city. I don't get why people would rather pay out the ass for an apartment rather than save up for some land elsewhere.
I live in a city, but despite it being left wing it's not crammed like San Francisco is but it's plagued by high rent because of government interference allowing rich investors to get priority over citizens on housing.
That being said, city life lets you save a lot of time and money getting around, because the shit around you is nearby. It means you don't have to burn money on shit like a car to move around - you can bike/walk to most of the things you need.
You spend less time commuting to your job (at least for me). My job is 5 minutes away from where I live and most of the stuff I need is 5-15 minutes away.
You don't waste time commuting and sitting in traffic going to and from your suburban/rural home.
However, unless I'm being paid 6 to 7 figures, nothing would make me want to live in shitholes like NYC and San Francisco.
Originally it was economic incentives, there was far more opportunities for independent wealth and freedom from generational poverty. Now it’s just retarded people who have become the generational poverty, which is why flight from liberal hellholes has skyrocketed.
They were willing to be crowded because it used to allow greater opportunities. Economic being the primary, which is why the “starving artist” trope only exists in massive Metropolitan areas, when a large source of capital is available in an area then people will flock to it. Think of it like how Californian companies are fleeing to Texas cities, Californian cities are larger but the government has made capital access minimal, so the businesses move to areas where there is more capital to access. This is also why corporations moved “headquarters” to poor countries who offer cheaper accommodations. A prostitute could make more money than most skilled labor jobs in a city simply because the access to capital is greater.
And that's where the seeds of the city's later corruption and decline starts, right when the thing seems the healthiest. It isn't just legit businessmen that contribute positive things that are attracted to a growing boom town.
The Plague didn't stop excess farm boys from moving into the cities for all the job opportunities and cheap housing that the disease opened up for the survivors.
Anyway, pretty much any now-big, squalid city started out as a "boom town".
Weak people that require the herd to survive.
Exactly this. They're herd animals. The idea of existing outside of the supposed safety of the herd frightens them.
The irony, of course, is that cities are objectively the least safe places to be on the planet, whether because of crime, disease, their high value as military targets, or how easily disrupted their fragile parasitic ecosystem is by a single blocked road.
There was a very short time in my life I thought about it, back then I lived closer to the city than I do now. One big pro when you do live in a city is driving can be a brutal and irritating experience. So the allure of being able to walk places isn't bad. Particularly back then I was having to commute 5 days a week, burning away many hours in a car in traffic is a horrible way to start and end every day.
I've since changed jobs and I was working from home the majority of the time even before Covid world. So I moved out to the fringe suburban areas. When I did have to go to the office, it was a long way but it's wasn't that common and now it's almost not at all. It's so much better being further out from all that mess, just to be able to go about daily business without dealing with the driving alone. I think in hindsight if I had ended up in an actual dense urban condo I would have not lasted a year. No space to work on projects, build things, etc along with being surrounded by leftists would have been a total no-go.
I don't get it myself. I look forward to moving to a nice small countryside location instead of the city. I don't get why people would rather pay out the ass for an apartment rather than save up for some land elsewhere.
I live in a city, but despite it being left wing it's not crammed like San Francisco is but it's plagued by high rent because of government interference allowing rich investors to get priority over citizens on housing.
That being said, city life lets you save a lot of time and money getting around, because the shit around you is nearby. It means you don't have to burn money on shit like a car to move around - you can bike/walk to most of the things you need.
You spend less time commuting to your job (at least for me). My job is 5 minutes away from where I live and most of the stuff I need is 5-15 minutes away.
You don't waste time commuting and sitting in traffic going to and from your suburban/rural home.
However, unless I'm being paid 6 to 7 figures, nothing would make me want to live in shitholes like NYC and San Francisco.