More houses are needed in many countries to cope with increasing people populations. Would it be better to build houses in-existing towns and cities or to develop new towns in rural areas.

It is necessary that housing demand increases in many nations to solve enhanced people. Some statements choose to add new house in towns, while the last opinion creates new life in rural areas and in my point of view, I believe that developed remote area is the best selection.

According to the latest documentary on Discovery Channel about distributive citizens, the program said that the majority of big cities in the world has confronted over crowded situation. Urban planning experts are rather dubious about the future. There are no spaces to create new apartments or flats in town. It makes people have to stay in poor condition of the environment such as lack of sanitation. Moreover, it seems easy to find jobs. In truth, many populations produce competition to obtain occupations. This condition might possibly add the numbers of unemployments who lost their job or cannot win in searching jobs. In cities do pollution troubles appear. Air and water contamination are produced by houses and factories. The effect of that is diseases many inhabitants become sick. Which be caused illness such as skin cancer and respiratory disease.

There are many advantages of building new towns in countryside areas. Firstly, very wide vacant lands are there. Governments and developers may plan a new design of city planning. They can manage city facilities for today up to next 100 or 200 year such as, sanitation, transportation network or education building. Secondly, it is easy to grow new employments. Opportunity to built new business is opened. The last, the weather and natural condition are still fresh. In villages, there is no pollution improving health might be reached.

It is crucial to build new towns. Personally, I support that new societies in remote areas ay tackle an addiction of population in the world.