More and more people in the city live in small spaces and without outdoor space.

Do you think it is a
positive or negative development?

Over the last few decades, there has been an increase in population density. Consequently, many a
person in urban areas resides in modest spaces and without open-air space. I take benefits and
drawbacks into account in equal measure and justifications are as follows.

On the one hand, the avail of this trend is that it is liable to facilitate saving money. It seems to be
ascribed to the fact that such accommodations probably require less furniture and home maintenance is
likely to be inexpensive compared to huge dwellings. In addition, much as house rents and purchases
can incur an enormous expense, house prices keep soaring. Hence, it would be a judicious decision to
opt for a bijou residence without any outdoor space because it would be not prohibitive. Lightening the
financial burden is conducive to fulfilling demands for eating, education, and recreational activities,
which can empower citizens to enhance their quality of life.

On the other hand, such houses could exert an adverse influence on city dwellers. They can pose serious
health hazards. When it comes to fitness, these urbanites tend to face risks of a sedentary lifestyle in
the light of the scarcity of space, namely backyards to do physical activities. They, as a result, are more
likely to contract diseases such as obesity and cardiovascular diseases. Besides, that spaces are narrow
would restrict the number of family get-togethers, to the detriment of psychological health. No available
space do they have to throw exhilarating barbecues or garden parties.

In conclusion, I hold the notion that this tendency in megacities exercises salutary and deleterious
effects on life including health and budget.