ITT: Should the developing nations place limits on internal rural-urban

Absolutely. Uncontrolled internal migration, mostly to urban areas, results in housing crises, skyrocketing housing prices, and a depopulation of rural areas which can be vital to the economy. In a developing nation, this leads to mass poverty and basically anarchy-ridden favelas and the crime that comes with them. People who could otherwise contribute to the country thus becomes stuck in poverty, which hampers the development aspect of the developing nation. Since developing nations also mostly rely on rural economy professions like farming, mass urban immigration can destabilize the economy before it has transformed into one based on industry and services. That rapid decrease in agriculture also leads to food shortages and famines, like in Africa. Urban immigration can´t be stopped but should be kept at a slow and controlled pace so that the economy can keep up the pace and so that cities are well prepared for people moving into them. I think a permit would be required to move from a rural area into an urban or even suburban areas, but no permit would be required to do the opposite. Moving between rural places should be encouraged instead.

>>127885500
yes
and
checked

>>127885500
The infrastructure must accommodate all other issues will arise.

>>127887499
what the fuck, that's an inappropriately well-reasoned, serious reply, go back to r3ddit

>>127887499
Hmm, but doesn't this conflict with the freedom of movement? How can we justify this and explain to the mindless masses that this is for raison d'État?

>>127887499
I couldn't agree with you more. Based Sweden.

>>127887499

Good post.

>>127885500
Too late for Turkey, you already elected Erdog the village laz idiot as mayor of Istanbul, then as PM and President. I'm pretty sure he shitted up Istanbul even more in the last few decades with his villager followers.

>>127890627
elections are a meme
latest referendum proved it

>>127889489
Of course it comes into conflict with several human rights. But faced with the choice between economic instability plus ridiculously high housing prices and or to take a step back and wait until you´re able to much more affordably get an urban home, most people will probably pick the latter. People who already live in urban areas would be for it because it would mean less overcrowding for them. Rural people would also be for such a proposal aswell, since it would prevent much needed human capital from moving away from the countryside, thus keeping rural areas alive and not brain-draining the countryside.

>>127891326
So it is the most logical option to limit migrations and not overlook the rural areas and provide them with their needs in order to avoid brain-drain.

>>127892328
Exactly. Rural and urban areas serve different aspects of a country´s economy and changing the balance too rapidly can result very badly for both the people and the economy. The government should not hesitate to limit some freedoms of the populace if it is for their better long-term wellbeing.

>>127887499
there was something along those lines before the democratic changes,ppl were unhappy with such restrictions but i admit it that they are on point,the reasoning is right and i benefive they are going to better a country as a whole

>>127893607
I would like to thank you for your insight and contribution to the thread. It has been fruitful for me.

Godspeed Sven.