Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2018
- Messages
- 1,710
The point is that the city will not expand horizontally without the government doing anything about it, and the the government would rather not because it's less cost- effective than the alternative of founding a new city.The counterargument for that is, "moving a capital is not free."
Now, if you want to talk about spending that huge amount of money on top of everything involved in expanding, that's a different idea. I've never said there aren't benefits to moving the capital, but the several of the downsides for keeping it there don't make sense.
Repairing walls has to happen regardless, since it's still a major city close to the border, and probably will be a focal point during a war. That's not a cost saved by moving the capital. You can't just abandon a city because you move the government. Though I wonder how much that cost is exaggerated for the sake of argument in the manga, considering how well these kinds of walls hold up.
If you want to dismiss all examples of others walled cities and claim this city is completely difference from everything else, you have to prove why this particular city is different from all other cities, and why those differences matter. You've not done so.
Maintaining walls is an eventuality - basically, future debt. They have to fix it, which makes staying even less cost-effective.
This city is unique because of the circumstances. The future rapid population growth isn't going to be a natural one, nor is it due to refugees. The new people are craftsmen and bureaucrats, so they shouldn't even settle to some vulnerable satellite village. There is also the larger incentive to move the capital, so any potential edicts are going to be weighed against that.