Quote:
Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright
Except we have over a century of research on the concept of economies of agglomeration. This is not some made up theory of mine, this is accepted fact in the world of real estate economics and can actually be measured and has been measured by economists. You can actually distill from data the effects of these theories by looking at how different cities grow over time. This theory of Economies of Agglomeration is generally accepted as the basic reason as to why cities exist at all. Wouldn't you think that if the opposite were true, humans would choose to locate as far apart from one another as possible (like wildcats or other territorial apex predators) and defend their territories against incursion so as to not lose resources to competitors?
I've got a great urban economics textbook for you to read if you really want to read more about this. I would also encourage you to read Jane Jacob's Death and Life of Great American Cities which describes the exact same effects but from an urban planner's perspective. Or you can just google it and find thousands of studies on this:
https://www.google.com/search?q=stud...hrome&ie=UTF-8 |
The economies of agglomeration—a concept that I fully understand—is not even the same topic that we are talking about. That is about concentration of industries. We are talking about clustering of wealthy people.
Anyhow, it’s fine—I love cities and urbanism, so I don’t see any need to debate this against my fellow city lovers. Let’s go celebrate the building boom together and move on from this.
Threaded Mode