>>2063995What do you mean, an "endpoint for growth"? Most of what makes modern cities possible is a working logistics system to provide food and services, i.e. highways.
>gave away the most valuable land (cities) Land value as a concept beyond inherent land value (flat, arable land is better than swamps or mountains or something unusable) isn't a good argument when talking about cities because land value is heavily influenced on what's near it. There are whole books on appraisal, what is pricey development now was farmland 50 years ago because of development around it, and that includes access.
The other thing for land value to work as an argument in these "best use" scenarios is to assume there is NO subsidized housing and all taxes from land value are re-invested in taxpaying citizens (which is rare in big cities).
