[Archetype]

Originally posted by Ichinaru19

Actually by having human populations live in closer proximity it reduces the effect on the environment. If more people lives in a city or high densely populated area it frees up land that can be given back to the wilderness. With more suburbs the only thing that is happening is more land is being used for human development which constricts wildlife movement and the ecosystem.

That is irrelevant when you are destroying the natural environment in the city. That also seriously degrades the quality of life for the wealthy people that will live in the world's tallest building. Why do you think cities are now thinking of alternative ways to introduce parks into city ecosystems? That still doesn't answer any of my questions posed regarding the transportation issues this will cause for the 30 million people coming to and from this one, isolated building every day. It also doesn't touch on the fact that most of China's population cannot afford to live here.

[Ichinaru19]

Originally posted by Archetype

That is irrelevant when you are destroying the natural environment in the city. That also seriously degrades the quality of life for the wealthy people that will live in the world's tallest building. Why do you think cities are now thinking of alternative ways to introduce parks into city ecosystems? That still doesn't answer any of my questions posed.

Here let me put it like this. You either destroy the natural life in a small confine area or you just destroy the land everywhere. This is besides building large buildings this is about the planet in a whole. Anyways why are we even bringing wealthy people into the picture? It is almost irrelevant to the topic. Cities are trying incorporate more parks not for the animals but for the people because as humans we still want to be connected to the environment. Do you honestly think that parks will help the ecosystem? It really doesnt.It just acts as a little island of human development that is cut off from the rest of the wildlife.

[Archetype]

Originally posted by Ichinaru19

Here let me put it like this. You either destroy the natural life in a small confine area or you just destroy the land everywhere. This is besides building large buildings this is about the planet in a whole. Anyways why are we even bringing wealthy people into the picture? It is almost irrelevant to the topic. Cities are trying incorporate more parks not for the animals but for the people because as humans we still want to be connected to the environment. Do you honestly think that parks will help the ecosystem? It really doesnt.It just acts as a little island of human development that is cut off from the rest of the wildlife.

I see what you are saying, however, the environment doesn't just signify the space being taken. It contains the environmental impact that the building will have on the surrounding area, including the people. China is already known for being extremely polluted. This building is being constructed efficiently, but the result is still extremely inefficient when it comes to power regulation and water consumption.

The ecosystem, in the way I used it, refers to the interactions between humans in a natural space. It contains the flow and distribution of life. In this case, parks do help the ecosystem by spreading the population over a larger expanse of land. People need green space to form a break between dense clusters of human activity. It has nothing to do with wildlife, although I assume the increase in pollution will only further destroy the pretty river that the building sits on.

Wealth has everything to do with it. Wealthy people have the means to obtain more space. They own more space. In fact, this building just throws more space into their collections and takes away potential space for those who share a two room apartment with an entire family. You are absolutely not helping the people that are negatively impacted by overpopulation. That is why this whole myth of "build up b/c overpopulation" is only hurting this community. A more practical approach to overpopulation is to create more affordable housing complexes (not this).

[Ichinaru19]

I understand what you are saying too but is the building really taking up that much space to make a difference of whether poor people can find an apartment to live in? Also not sure how legit the source is but it says the building we have apartments for low income and high income people. And yes of course people are better off when we are given more space, but a city will still not have a large of an impact on Earth than having human communities spread out. Anyways I wasn't arguing about the overpopulation argument :P Other people were

[Archetype]

Originally posted by Ichinaru19

I understand what you are saying too but is the building really taking up that much space to make a difference of whether poor people can find an apartment to live in? Also not sure how legit the source is but it says the building we have apartments for low income and high income people. And yes of course people are better off when we are given more space, but a city will still not have a large of an impact on Earth than having human communities spread out. Anyways I wasn't arguing about the overpopulation argument :P Other people were

It is taking up a lot of space if you consider that it was formerly undeveloped park. If you are going to build something with the intent of hindering overpopulation, which is why this project supposedly exists (not because the developer wants to create a huge building in a record time, even though we all know that's the developer's only real concern right now), you build affordable housing on a large scale. The source says the building will "be able to house low and high end communities". Key words, "be able", as in, if a realtor prices apartments in the World's Tallest Building at a very, very cheap price, people with low incomes can live there. Now, the core of each rectangle is planned to be commercial shopping and dining space. Do you think people of low income, besides shop owners within the building, could afford the rent? This is all theory, as it hasn't been constructed yet. We will see in March. Until then, I'm just going to forget this exists.