How many people you like would it take agreeing to move to X small city that is cheap but lacking community/social life for you to want to move there?
You could make a Kickstarter-like-thing out of this. twitter.com/BennettJonah/s
Conversation
Replying to
I’m going to go out on a limb and argue this is probably a bad idea for reasons or reasons unknown as yet. Ie societal systems disincentivize and resist this convergent migration pattern for a good reason. Any group cohesive enough to pull it off is probably a toxic cult.
I'm doing it in extreme slow motion
1
3
You’ve created a community of 2 households so far right? And one was already there, so basically... you moved near a friend 🤔
No points till you collect at least 15 people across at least 7 households
2
3
Show replies
Replying to
I'll go out on another limb and say that good reason is the counteracting motivations of larger social forces that value something other than individual wellbeing higher than individual wellbeing. Not because it's bad for the individuals.
4
Plus it’s an asshat assumption in the first place to assume any destination city lacks worthwhile people while whatever place your fleeing has all the good ones. False premise.
Consider the high rent a tax for condescension.
2
Hmm. That could be true, but preference for X does not imply contempt for not-X. People might presumably be open to locals joining whatever community they’re trying to intensify geographically. They will likely even try to pick places where that’s likely.
1
has the tech industry not already done this with SF (even though the actual coordination of it is less direct)?
your point may still stand but
I think you’re drawing from a systems-thinking principle about how a faster rate of change is more likely to overwhelm buffers and cause a major equilibrium shift or system failure
1
1
How much of what utotranslucence is saying is akin to the European migration in the colonial era?






