Part of the problem with cities like Venice is that there ends up being this large cost to preservation and limits on development which pushes the city to become a form of historic theme park in its best condition or a ruin in its worst.

The city can try to control the worst parts of tourism, but I feel like Venice is a city doomed to needing tourism to survive.

[–] Overzeetop@beehaw.org 12 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Many these cities are unsustainable as modern cities. Their creation and golden periods were marked by lavish spending of royalty and/or wealthy merchants (today’s billionaire class, but without jets and yachts to spend on). It’s almost impossible to rebuild to modern, tourist level usage without massive cash infusions and disruption of services for that maintenance.

[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 6 points 10 months ago

You also have differences in what makes a city location good or not. Venice was a very defensible location with easy access to shipping, which was the foundation of its economy.

The economics of a trade hub has shifted a lot since then, usually requiring the port to move a lot more goods and generally being the connection point between land and sea.