David Harvey: The Right to the City

Argument: Ever growing economic surplus is absorbed by ever

growing urbanization + consumption (in capitalism)

Harvey shows on examples from history that for capitalism to work, surplus capital must be absorbed. He argues the biggest absorbent is the built environment - growing urbanization. (grows in scale, spreads from developed to developing > globe, spreads from rich to poor - credit instruments)

On examples from history Harvey shows that a 'destructive' event i.e. Haussmann's new plan for Paris stimulates economy, creates jobs and consumption and ultimately growth. This growth has its limits - geographical, financial, demand, natural etc. when the limit is reached for the particular 'type' of growth, we experience a crisis. Growth stops, prices explode, jobs stop, all slows down. Then a new absorbent must be invented in order to 'stimulate' the economy, create jobs and wealth to be spent on more wealth creation. That is followed by another - bigger - crisis, followed by bigger 'destruction'. (war or) Consider NY & Moses; 2008 credit crunch - the collapse of suburb? 

Can we start slowing down, or better, can we not create absorbents with creating new colonias?