Wealth and Urban Living

well it's not 100% this or that -- it's mixed upreally-rich people don't have to work/commute, so prefer to live in countryside with gardensreally-poor people can't afford cars, and rich(=busy) cities usually have accomodations for them -- so they live inside busy cities

The rich want to and can afford to live in high cost of living areas. Everyone else is there to serve them.

i heard that in US living in downtown is for poor people, and rich people prefer slrawling suburbs

I dunno, the really rich tend to be attracted to cities more then the merely moderately rich. I think its possible that you are just working with a too low assessment of what really affording dense urban life looks like. Once you get into the realm where you can afford as much space as a generous suburban home but in a dense urban environment,...

That's an interesting way to think about it. For my city (Edmonton) it seems like if you're well off you're going to be living in a community in the city. It's the middle-class who are paying for a much larger home for a less convenient location.

That is an untrue generalization. Every large city has several high income, high density neighborhoods where wealthy people live when they prefer shorter commutes and access to amenities to larger living spaces.

On your first part I'd do exactly the opposite so please don't speak for me... Given the fact that the number 1 cause in the USA for "unnatural" deaths of school age individuals is now shootings (not cars like in other developed countries) I feel like the expression "when the game gets tough the tough get going should apply. Personally I feel like it's the bil(mil)lionaires new "game" of getting the credit but not doing the commitment.On the second par

Where are the people who work in those cities supposed to live? Are they expected to commute an hour a day, diminishing their earning potential and increasing their expenses? People in the wealthiest cities also tend to have access to more resources, due to the concentration and diversity of the population. Denying low and middle income families access also diminishes their potential, while diminishing the potential of cities through the reduction of diversity.At best, this sounds an argument

Maybe because it actually makes economic sense to stay. Cost of living, mainly for housing, in high-paying regions means that after a certain age you won't realize the benefits of the higher wages since you won't be able to pay off your mortgage before your career ends. In fact rent or mortgage interest may capture all of the salary bump and more.Working a menial job in a depressed area makes a lot more sense when a house there only costs $125,000.I understand that those open to

Wealth concentration to cities has lots of drawbacks. Housing can get incredibly expensive, mental illness rates go up, local government reflects the people less because of the larger population, and people feel like they need to upend their entire family just to live a quality life. There are tons of places in SF, NYC and others where there are 6 men in a 2 bedroom apartment. All that just so that corporations can reap the benefits of a higher worker density. That's no way to structure a s