re: The Economic Breakdown of Rural vs Urban America

quote:

---

So much for the "objective" political talk.

---

Objectively: We live in a representational dual federalist Republic made up of states and a federal government. We do not live in a democracy and we do not have majority population rule in federal government. Deal with it. Our system of government is not set up to be dependent on population density of a given area. It is set up to balance power and decision making across a range of factors throughout the United States.

Further: while robots are taking unskilled low level manufacturing jobs, there are plenty of labor jobs that can be had in infrastructure as well as the management, maintenence, etc... Of the robots in those factories.

Further, even if a robot does most of the work the people that own, operate, and are employed by those factories need representation and protection against the vast consumers.

To use an analogy: if a city is made up of 2 plots of land, one farm and one hotel/business center, and the farm which feeds and nurishes the entire population has 1 owner and 5 workers and the business center (which consumes and sells the goods produced by the farm) has 1500 people in it, then what is a better system of government? Popular vote, or a representative system whereby the needs of the farm and the needs of the business center are equal despite unequal population numbers?

Further, as technology increases, so too will the ability to telecommute and work from home and we are already seeing a shift back to rural living in some sectors where you don't need to go to an office everyday.

quote:

---

This is not an American problem. 

This is not even a “City folks” problem. 

This is a capitalistic problem. 

---

Capitalism is not a problem. Please explain what system you think is better and why?

quote:

---

That's one of the reasons red states are less wealthy, because a large amount of their workforce leaves.

---

If you look at patterns this isn't really true. Hell, Texas is growing like crazy

Again, automation and remote working ability will change "rural" American wealth but I'm not really sure that's a good thing.

People residing in regal areas do so for reasons usually unrelated to conspicuous consumption and ever increasing wealth. They may live on a reservation, live on natural subsistence, love the low cost of living, etc

Now’s the time to buy land in rural areas if you have the money

Well... to be fair, as my grandpa always says... it’s always a good time to buy land since there’s a finite amount

You earn more per hour in urban areas but the costs of living is higher.

But economics is just part of the quality of life. There is closeness to nature, cultural amenities, crime, etc.. Hard to put numbers on some of these, but from victimsofcrime.org:
Violent crime rates per 100,000
Metropolitan areas, 409.4
Cities outside metropolitan areas, 380.4
Non-metropolitan counties, 117.0

Property crime rates per 100,000
Metropolitan areas, 2949.8
Cities outside metropolitan areas, 3534.9
Non-metropolitan counties, 1539.3

quote:

---

volod

---

You are just an amazing product of public education and historically black universities.

quote:

---

We agree on this. Maybe I have misinterpreted your answers, but I always assume you and ShortyRob are thought rural areas are better than Urban areas. Economically that isnt the case. Not preferring a certain lifestyle, that's open to interpretation.

---

Well, not everyone is chasing after the dollar and think bigger, more, and newer are better. I'm one of those and know many more, and their personal peace and natural surroundings are more important than wealth.

I think it's terribly problematic to think the wealthiest areas are the best areas. They certainly are not for everyone.

As urbanization has grown. So have a myriad of disorders that go with the lifestyle.

quote:

---

Maybe I have misinterpreted your answers, but I always assume you and ShortyRob are thought rural areas are better than Urban areas.

---

I prefer them but I wouldn't assess some quality metric. There are some sorry assed Rural areas.

But, I submit that there are many rural or simply smaller cities where you can live FAR better. If I chose to for example, I could easily raise my salary by 50% or more if I moved to DC but, I'd rather drag my eyeballs out of their sockets AND..........while my salary would be higher, my standard of living would NOT be.

quote:

---

Economically that isnt the case.

---

You really can't say this at all. Economically, you flat out can live a LOT better in a rural area. It's not even close.

No one lives in ALL rural areas, so comparing the average rural area to the average urban area is irrelevant.

Choose one of the solid less populated areas and you'll multiply your standard of living easily.

quote:

---

When you look at most traditional Southern state economies, the only ones that are doing poorly are LA and MS.

---

Thanks to an uneducated populace who keeps electing corrupt Democrat pieces of shite.

Well I work for a pretty good company after gaining some experience, so yeah.

And I graduated from a regular public university as well.

Or you are referring to my post being the counter to "modern" right wing ideology. That's my choice. My favorite Republicans are Eisenhower, the Paul Family, and Ben Shapiro.

Well lefties like to pretend the divide is urban/rural but that's not the case. It just gives them someone to be angry with

LINK

Basically even in more rural states, urban and rural voting patterns vary wildly

Choosing urban and rural states is a simple method of picking a villain

quote:

---

For now, please repeat after me: What divides Americans most of all isn’t the population densities of the places they live, but the centuries-old regional cultures to which they belong.

---