• Cryophilia@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    21
    ·
    1 year ago

    The vast majority of people do not have any sort of medical need for a house. This does not contribute to the conversation.

    • Meowoem@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s not really true though, most people are much happier in a house and have far fewer sources of stress in their life. Also high density housing is an awfull place to bring up kids, that’s the exact reason London is knocking down all the old tower blocks like elephant and castle, all the studies showed it was a horrible place to live for everyone there.

      I know you want this solution to work because no one likes American suburbia but it doesn’t have to be a choice between two types of hell, there are actually good options like European suburbs with local shops, bus and cycle routes to pedestrianised shopping areas and lots of green spaces.

    • Robaque@feddit.it
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      You might have a point but you’re being an insensitive ass and it’s definitely possible that there are under-researched/discussed potential mental health side effects to apartments / city living. There is certainly a conversation to be had.

        • Robaque@feddit.it
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          How is it “not this discussion”? The general topic is about peoples’ housing/aparment preferences and Rukmer’s concerns are perfectly valid.