Yeah, because more humans live in cities than rural areas definitionally, so of course the environmental consequences for human life are greater. The one depends on the other.

Any serious policy to help humans generally or Americans specifically live a carbon-neutral, ecologically sustainable way of life needs to account for how people live right now. That’s the starting point to an effective policy.

If your plan is for Americans who lives in cities to become nomadic herbivores who ride draft animals, that’s a serious change from our current way of life. Would we have grazing rights? What about right of ways for our noble steeds?

The reality is that many rural areas are desertifying and other rural areas have barred themselves from developing further, so the options on the table are die or move to a city. People are pretty resourceful and open-minded when the alternative is “or death.” Eddie Izzard said it better.