And this "technology" is banned for the right reasons.
It is demonstrably harmful to the enviroment, physical and mind health and the society in general.
I'm all for this:
It is demonstrably harmful to the enviroment, physical and mind health and the society in general.
I'm all for this:
I'm having trouble understanding how single-family housing is less harmful to the environment, relying on this statement and my back-of-the-envelope calculations alone. Likewise, what are the effects on physical and mental well-being for people who have to live in the street, because affordable housing is "banned", and they can't afford a suburban house?
This can be supplemented to benefit the poor sooner by eg. requiring a subset of units in high-end developments to be subsidized for people with lower incomes.
I lived most of it in the high-rises, and not slums at all. "Respectable neighbourhoods".
I'm not talking about slums.
I pity the people who choose to live in those anthills.
I hate people who advocate to force other people to live in those.
I'm talking about overcrowding. Not enough private space, not enough public space, not enough transport. And it's a death trap if something goes just slightly wrong with the infrastructure. Have you witnessed shit fountains out of you r toilet? I did. Have you seen what a gas explosion does to those? A section or three just collapses, top to bottom, and everyone there is dead. What if water mains gets cut off because the electricity cut off and so there are no lifts? What if it's 15F outsite and the heaters die?
This is no way to live.
Listen, I'm not going to disrespect you for growing up in the projects or whatever. Those things are usually out of our control. But you got to let other people live the way they want to live, man.