With the advancement of society, constantly increased citizens in city areas led to overload on accommodation. To solve this issue there are numerous opinions that argue building skyscrapers would be a viable way; however, I strongly perceive that encouraging inhabitants to transition to the rural areas could be an optimally greater choice.
On the one hand, expanding more high apartment buildings is known as a consensus choice by a vast number of citizens. In fact, millions of people argued that high towers normally are able to hold thousands of people in smaller scale sizes, thus alleviating the housing shortage in urban areas. Take a billion inhabited China, as an example, significant investments in vertical expansion have shown some relief in overcrowded urban regions. Nevertheless, as available land for construction becomes increasingly scarce and financial resources become strained, simply erecting more skyscrapers may not address the root causes of overcrowding, thus rendering this option unsustainable in the long run.
Conversely, promoting rural migration offers a more sustainable solution with several advantages. The countryside provides ample space for residential developments and offers an alternative to the urban housing crisis. Accordingly to migrating statistics indicated a significant reduction in urban overcrowding as individuals have a tendency to relocate to suburban areas. Moreover, government initiatives to urge rural relocations, such as financial assistance and employment opportunities, can not only effectively cut down the pressures of urban accommodation but also encourage a balanced distribution of population between urban and rural areas.
To conclude, while building extension may be beneficial to certain extents, I am more convinced that the emboldening people moving to rural regions is a greater solution to overloaded accommodation pressure.