Your entire argument can be used to show that no cities (except I guess mining towns?) have inherent importance and you have made no attempt to address this obvious implication of what you’re saying. You still won’t define what the hell you mean inherent importance anyways, and I can only assume that’s because you can’t without it sounding ridiculous.
That’s not a flaw in my point, that’s the whole point. No city has inherent importance, least of all New York. It’s a monument to self-congratulation — a place that mistakes its own noise for relevance. When the money dries up or people move on, it’ll be just another overbuilt relic.
You keep demanding some mystical definition of “inherent importance” because you need it to exist, not because it does.
Your just a silly plate of spaghetti at this point and a last word freak.
Your entire reply boils down to feelings instead of facts. Zero evidence, zero logic, just noise.
If you want to debate, bring an argument instead of a tantrum. Right now you are just a bowl spaghetti w/o sauce n cheese.
Your entire argument can be used to show that no cities (except I guess mining towns?) have inherent importance and you have made no attempt to address this obvious implication of what you’re saying. You still won’t define what the hell you mean inherent importance anyways, and I can only assume that’s because you can’t without it sounding ridiculous.
That’s not a flaw in my point, that’s the whole point. No city has inherent importance, least of all New York. It’s a monument to self-congratulation — a place that mistakes its own noise for relevance. When the money dries up or people move on, it’ll be just another overbuilt relic.
You keep demanding some mystical definition of “inherent importance” because you need it to exist, not because it does.
Your just a silly plate of spaghetti at this point and a last word freak.