• Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    1 year ago

    You literally cannot grow sufficient food to feed the population of the city within the city. Every city requires massive rural areas for sustenance.

    Rural areas have sufficient abundance to both sustain themselves and the cities.

    • ᕙ(⇀‸↼‶)ᕗ@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      can you give me any source for that?

      i heard paris is considered a beautiful city. if all humans lived in a city as dense as paris we could all live in an area the size of germany.

      growing population says it is impossible to feed the world with conventional farming as this will further reduce nature.

      rural areas are whats destroying the planet.

      also, were i lived the farmer has an ipad and the machines do all the work. nobody really needs to live there anymore as you can easily check from the number of employees in farming. constant decline. it is bs to think people need to be in thos rural areas but you can wait till it is 100% machine made.

      • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Rural areas provide food and raw materials for the cities. That’s their entire purpose.

        If all people lived in a city as dense as Paris, they would all starve: Paris does not have a single farm producing food.

        If all people lived in a city as dense as Paris, every manufacturer would be out of business due to lack of raw materials: Paris does not have a single mine.

        If rural areas are destroying the planet, it is because the cities are demanding from those areas more than the planet can provide.

          • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Socialist cities make the same demands on rural areas that capitalist cities do. It’s primarily a function of population density, not economic model.

            At best, a square mile of farmland can feed about 6000 people. That’s under ideal conditions and assuming vegetarians. Want a little meat in your diet, and 2500 is a more realistic number.

            A square mile of Chicago contains about 12,000 people. That’s 2 to 4.8 square miles of farmland for every square mile of city. Chicago is about 230 square miles.

            A square mile of New York contains about 30,000 people. That’s 5 to 12 sq miles of farmland for every square mile of city. New York is about 300 square miles.

            A square mile of Paris contains about 53,000 people. 8.8 to 21.2 sq miles of farmland for every square mile of city. Paris is about 40 square miles.