Ec330
6.4.2016
How Cities Make People Richer
Glaesar introduces his book by explaining that cities are made of flesh, rather than concrete. The city has triumphed in economic and technological ways through the provision of opportunities that lead to a further increase in opportunities. It is a foundation that Glaesar bases his arguments, especially in the aspect of how cities have made people richer by the minute. Being an elaborate and renowned economist, Glaesar centers his arguments on the fact that human contact, especially in the city, enables the populace to grow in terms of trust and cooperation. (p 35). He supports this by explaining that this proximity is crucial in the generation and distribution of wealth, as well as in creation of new inventions. In economics, as similar to in other aspects of the society, interaction enables the human species, especially those in urban centers to foster good relationships. A good network equals good business and invention viability, hence, the gradual and consistent generation of wealth. Despite scholars hailing the growth of online presence as detrimental to human relationships, Glaesar attributes these relationships as highly prized and beneficial in this global economy (p 38). As experienced in the city of Detroit, Glaesar accredits its industrialization and substantial growth of wealth to the fact that it had a group of very well educated workers with creative skills in entrepreneurship. Despite struggling during the nineteenth century with only one industry and a number of workers who were lowly at skill, mainly due to lack of experience, this city managed to transform into an area full of creative entrepreneurs and a wide array of industries (p 57). However, the city has “shrunk to greatness.” Glaesar goes on to pin point that cities are in fact the best places to gain cultural as well as material wealth. A lot of the wealth in America in grossed in twenty-two of the metropolitan zones. He points out that even in cities of the lowest rankings, even those in third world areas such as Kinshasa; provide more opportunities and better jobs than their corresponding rural areas. He notes explicitly that a city is the best place for impoverished communities to prosper. This is because of the presence of many and different opportunities, as compared to those that can be found in the rural areas. Nevertheless, he goes on to note that a city that cannot allow the poor people of its community to “climb the ladder” and at least crawl out of its impoverished state is already a failing city (p. 81). Furthermore, he notes that crime in a city repels the expert workers who are in every way vital to the cities growth of wealth as well as their own (p 132). He calls this the urban rebirth, touching on the subject of infrastructure, where roads are key in ensuring the efficiency of a city, especially through the aspect of trade (p 102). Roads then provide opportunities for wealth expansion, enabling local and international trade as well as human interaction and opportunities for jobs. When an ambitious person thinks of being rich, this …show more content…
He states, “Labor productivity and wages were significantly higher in those places where density was easier to develop” (p 142). He goes on to state the opposite of this constitutes expensive living. In his argument, he explains that cities attract ambitious and learned people. Taking advantage of this, the denser the number of learned people, the higher the chances of sharing knowledge, forming networks of novelty that allow for the upsurge of innovations, and by association, the rise in productivity. This leads to wealth generation and maximization in growth, creating more opportunities for other people to take over. This process will maximize the wealth of the “opportunity-maker” through the jobs made and distributed to other people seeking opportunities. With increased urban migration, cities have grown denser by the year, as seen in Manhattan. Glaesar notes that a city such as this is 74% wealthier than any other place. Simple housing may seem tiresome, but Glaesar acknowledges that in an area such as Houston, families are 58% wealthier (p 187). Therefore, he recommends to urban planners that the denser the city, the more affordable housing becomes, and the wealthier people grow as they get to retain (p