[inetknght]

> The core actual problem is that there are good places to live

Nah. Climate change is real, and humans can absolutely affect it.

Not enough good places to live? Make new ones. It takes decades or centuries but it can be done.

[Workaccount2]

You can't just make new places attractive, they usually are proximal to valuable resources or land features. A dramatic example of this are the arab states that are trying to brute force make the desert an attractive place to be. Nothing in those cities is economically organic, it's all oil money trying to LARP functional cities built in logical locations.

[inetknght]

> A dramatic example of this are the arab states that are trying to brute force make the desert an attractive place to be

They're doing it wrong. I'll point to places adjacent to the sahara building a "green wall" which is turning parts of the sahara back to a savannah and replenishes the water table.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xbBdIG--b58

Andrew Millison's youtube channel has several videos on the subject, and related subjects in other parts of the world too.

https://www.youtube.com/@amillison

[Workaccount2]

I think you are confusing nature with economic vitality. There needs to be economic value inherent in a location for a city to thrive. Having grass and water doesn't mean much at all in this regard. You need things like natural harbors, navigable river ways or mine-able resources.

Pretty much all the good spots for cities have already been claimed, hundreds of years or even millennia ago. These are the spots people live in, and the spots people want to live in (as evidenced by ever increasing cost to live there).

[inetknght]

> Having grass and water doesn't mean much at all in this regard. You need things like natural harbors, navigable river ways or mine-able resources.

Harbors? No. Trains and airplanes exist.

River ways? Los Angeles and California have demonstrated, with the LA river, that rivers can be constructed. Also, trains and airplanes exist. Wanna complain about no water? Well that's where land revitalization comes in.

Mine-able resources? Perhaps. There are lots (!) of resources in deserts that aren't mined. I also argue that food is basically a mine-able resource. I also argue that many resources can be imported instead. I also argue that plenty of people can work remotely without ever working a field or a mine.

[ty6853]

In my state the people are there because there is water. You can't make new places attractive, because all the people will be dead. It's basically a 100% correlation between location of towns and whether you can economically drill or divert water there.