Dbq The Advantages Of Cities

Living in the city would be harder as well because of how complicated things have gotten. It would also be more crowded, louder and more expensive – as mentioned before. There would also be faster Wi-Fi and more traffic jams – due to the amount of people living in cities. People living in cities will also be higher class/standard because of all the advanced resources used nowadays. However, people will also be unhealthier because of the pollution. Although people would have to pay more for things in the city, they would also get payed more and the city would also have more job options to choose from. The crime rate would also be higher and it would also be harder to socialise; since everyone is so involved to

The first urban civilization also had pros and con. The advantages were that people ere specialized in different things. They had increase in crops because of the water resources. They also had a government that keep the order and safety of the people. However, like in everything there was son disadvantages, one there were poor sanitation from all the people that were in the cities. In addition, there was social problems between the

Many theorists helped develop the ways that cities were viewed and what components they must have. Max Weber theorized that “. . . cities cannot be defined by one characteristic—such as population . . . A city, then as Weber argues, is recognized as a settlement embedded with strong economic and political institutions” (Monti, D. J., Borer, M. I., & Macgregor, L. C. 2015, p. 75). According to Weber, cities must have facilities where people can buy and sell, a government that runs the city, a fair and just legal system, and people who protect citizens and enforces laws. Cities must have diversity and multiple aspects that help it grow and thrive. Community connections are essential for city life, and to add the diversity of city life.

The place where children grow is important for their future. The place has a lot of benefit for children. First, the big city has a good school for children. For example, if the children live in the big city, they will go private school or they can go wherever they want. The big city has experienced teachers, so the children may learn more right information. Moreover, the children have got easy transportation. The children learn to go somewhere without parents. For instance, when the children miss the bus, they have to run behind the bus, so they can learn to be punctual .If the children are lost, they have to use bus or taxi, so they may learn regular spend money. Finally, if the children grow in a big city, they'll have a good culture. For

If you live near a major city like I do, you know about the high price of living and the constant traffic. The reason of this is that these cities have high demand for specific occupation. The flip side of this problem is that small cities like the place where my mom grew up have low population because people don't want to work there. The trend is going to continue unless there is an urge to change. The breakthrough will finding ways to bring young educated people to parts of the country other than major cities. Currently there are scholarship programs aimed to get people to move to less populated cities to work in to spread it out. But I believe that in the next few years, this will grow and more money will be put to spreading out demand for

While in the city, you have fewer unique places. There is an upside to living in the city, there are new things that do pop up. For example, plays, music events, sporting events etc. With this, you will never be alone. Where as in the country you always can find a quiet place to be alone. Although this is a downside in the city, you have more opportunities to find who have similar interests as you. Another aspect, is crime. There are two different ways to look at this. While in the city you could think that the people are safer due to the fact of guns, or you can

The end of seignorialism forces people to move to city for employment opportunity and therefore provided labour force for mass labour and industrial revolution escalated the pace of urbanization. People forms city, and each individual has their own opinion, therefore city is a place where the idea clashed and the new ideology formed everyday, this is why city is the source of change. Since renaissance, the proportion of population dwelling in urban area has been ever-increasing, therefore in the city information transfers faster, and there is a higher chance for people to rise up in the city than the country side, due to the proximity.

In addition, a lot of infrastructure is provided in cities. It leads directly increased the life quality. There are transportation, libraries, parks, zoos in close proximity which is not as many as the countryside. Noise, air pollution, light pollution are taking place because of population explosion. For instance, the destroying of the eco-system leads to the deaths of most of the wild creatures who lives around cities. Moreover, these pollutions also has serious impacts on human’s developments. That utilize of the energy resources for the next generation that will be limited. That is to say, environmental problem is facing a baptism of life. In brief, although urbanization leads directly to increased amounts of pollution, it also provides greater opportunities for employment and access to localized infrastructure. Taking into account both sides of argument, living in cities is more suitable for those who want to have a hurried life. Housing problems have it challenges of Urbanization in which when the industrial age began their was options of families that would either buy a home on the outskirt of town where transportation would be a problem for families to get around, or there was the option to rent little rooms in boardinghouses. Later after families

Many families and individuals find themselves at some point questioning the advantages of city living versus country living. It is nearly impossible to find a good answer to this question. What is good for one person might not be good for another. Some people enjoy the busy, hyper active life of the city where they can use all conveniences and have limitless opportunities for work and relaxation. At the same time, other people feel the desire to be closer to nature. They take pleasure in living in the calm and peaceful environment of the countryside and spending their free time riding four-wheelers, having bonfires, and going horse-back

Gordon & Richardson and Ewing raise different arguments in regards to different elements of compact cities and sprawls. These arguments are based on their respective views and literature reviews that raises questions on the environmental friendliness, economic efficiency, social equity and the place of technology on future development of cities. Gordon and Richardson arguments propose sprawls instead of compact cities. Although most planners advocate for compact cities, they are convinced that compact cities are not always beneficial in the long run. Gordon and Richardson argue that auto costs in compact cities are still higher than in suburbs even with the short distances found in compact cities (Gordon & Richardson 98). The average dweller in the compact city travels more than the one in the sprawls which exposes the environment to risks from pollutions.

As communities continue to urbanize, the gap between those that live in the city and those that live on the countryside increase. To most people, there is no difference between the two lifestyles because a home is a home; each come with their own advantages and disadvantages. That is true for every living space, however living on the countryside or in the city provide the occupants with very contrasting lifestyle. Scientists have begun to look deeper into the matter by researching how both locations differ and how they can take a toll on a person’s health. Studies have shown that these two different scenes can affect the amount of pollution expelled, an individual’s health and living expenses. These aspects are all factors when it comes to an individual’s decision on whether to not to live in a rural or urban community.

Residence in the city can have a greater variety of things to do and different varieties of people to meet. Residing in the city can give you better opportunities to make friends than the country because everyone lives so close together and the county has property at a farther distance. Even though the property is separated out the country area, it would be hard not to run into an individual that you may be familiar with because they are usually in small towns. City life would be great for individuals that love meeting new people every day and doing a variety of things in their free time.

When it comes to healthy and happy residents, city-dwellers win out over smaller communities. While we don’t always equate big-city living with good health, it seems that a poll from Gallup and Healthways found this to be true. People who live in cities, on average, have significantly lower rates of smoking, obesity, diabetes, high blood pressure, high cholesterol and depression.

725 Ponce is part of the New City development projects, which pursues the preservation of historic structures while seeking modern use for them – focusing on sustainability, technology and its community. It will be a $140 million mixed-use renovation with a 60,000 square foot urban prototype Kroger below a 360,000 square feet class-A loft office space.

If we look at the history, the process of urbanization has been associated with other important economic and social transformations, which have brought greater mobility from one place to another, longer life expectancy and population aging. Cities are important elements of development and poverty reduction in both urban and rural areas. As they emphasize on national economic activity and paved links between rural areas and cities. Urban living viewed as higher levels of literacy and education, better health