Imbecile; a million people spread out across the countryside consume far more wilderness than a million people living in one city Live closer together = leave more for nature!https://twitter.com/YeetNationalist/status/1019693698534162433 …
-
-
Replying to @380kmh
The implication is that there will always be the same amount of people, in truth cities promote massive population growth whereas rural towns have much slower growth rates
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @G0ngoozler
lmfao where do you think city population growth comes from? they're fertility sinks; even during London's rise in the 19th century it was *rural migration* which kept it growing, not urban fertility
1 reply 0 retweets 11 likes -
Replying to @380kmh
In the 19th century and earlier migration was the main cause absolutely this is not the case today however
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @G0ngoozler
this is absolutely still the case today, did you think San Francisco and Tokyo are just hotbeds of fertility?
3 replies 0 retweets 13 likes -
Replying to @espresseaux @G0ngoozler
the more URBAN you get--whether we're talking ancient Rome or modern Beijing
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.