U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-05-2012, 11:50 AM
 
Location: Boston
1,082 posts, read 2,492,836 times
Reputation: 908

Advertisements

Okay, regarding city slicker and country bumkin. I'll admit, I used the latter term, and it was in direct response to earlier lines about city slickers. I don't really see people in such terms, just wanted to illustrate something that was already happening in this thread by some of the posters arguing against the city. My own feelings are expressed in a few follow-up posts, which are that city and rural are both important.

But I need to start insisting on some facts and evidence from the folks talking about feeding us and such, as if that is solely manifested by the good work and roads out in the farm belt. If cities didn't produce massive quantities of economic activity, and house millions of people, nobody would buy the food. So, I'm not sure what point is supposed to be made by this line, other than to confirm that rural areas depend on urban areas for roads and livelihood. I don't see any of the ardent city-bashers recognizing the obvious corollary, though, which is that in order for this to happen, cities need to thrive. Part of the recipe for urban success is good, reliable, and available public transporation.

Let's build the roads to transport the food and other natural resources, but let's also build the subways needed by the people buying the food.

On the ethanol thing, not at all sure what that is supposed to mean, but you do realize, don't you, that ethanol is an example of a huge subsidy to rural communities. Right?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-05-2012, 11:52 AM
 
Location: Florida
398 posts, read 622,506 times
Reputation: 261
If you want to bring facts in on the current tax population, it is necessary to take a historical view to this and see why that is the current case. America was built on very large rural lots, the industrialization and concentrations came later, in every region. The cities make more money, but at what expense? Usually more crime, more pollution, more damage to the environment, more people being oppressed, less free time, etc. Now I like what is usually found *in* cities but the necessary *need* for cities at least in the American sense doesn't always sit well with me. I'm generally not a fan of any system which attempts to efficiently organize humans. Most of my thought derives from Rousseau and Jefferson on this matter.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-05-2012, 12:12 PM
 
Location: Pennsylvania
1,392 posts, read 1,278,079 times
Reputation: 936
Quote:
Originally Posted by HenryAlan View Post
But I need to start insisting on some facts and evidence from the folks talking about feeding us and such, as if that is solely manifested by the good work and roads out in the farm belt. If cities didn't produce massive quantities of economic activity, and house millions of people, nobody would buy the food. So, I'm not sure what point is supposed to be made by this line,
The point made is that people in a place like NYC would starve to death and the city would have to be abandoned if it weren't for roads allowing food to be shipped in from rural parts of the country. The same goes for wood for construction, salt, electricity since the US runs off coal more than any other source and coal is mined in rural/semi-rural parts of the country. So at most the relationship is symbiotic.

Quote:
On the ethanol thing, not at all sure what that is supposed to mean, but you do realize, don't you, that ethanol is an example of a huge subsidy to rural communities. Right?
Which is supported by most cities as "clean fuel" and has support from the democratic party which tends to have strong holds in cities.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-05-2012, 12:15 PM
 
Location: Boston
1,082 posts, read 2,492,836 times
Reputation: 908
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lizz0rd View Post
If you want to bring facts in on the current tax population, it is necessary to take a historical view to this and see why that is the current case.
Sounds good, looking forward to seeing the facts!
Quote:
America was built on very large rural lots, the industrialization and concentrations came later, in every region. The cities make more money, but at what expense? Usually more crime, more pollution, more damage to the environment, more people being oppressed, less free time, etc.
Relative to population, they do none of this. Of course, there are distortions. A factory, for example, creates pollution. But not all cities are industrial, and not all industry is exclusive to urbanity. There are plenty of rural smokestacks belching polution.
Quote:

Now I like what is usually found *in* cities but the necessary *need* for cities at least in the American sense doesn't always sit well with me.
These things that you like would not exit without the city.
Quote:
I'm generally not a fan of any system which attempts to efficiently organize humans. Most of my thought derives from Rousseau and Jefferson on this matter.
Cities are self selecting, self organizing. You'd have a point regarding Rousseau and Jefferson if the urban form was being forced on you out in the country, or if you were being coerced into moving to an urban location. Where is this happening?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-05-2012, 12:52 PM
 
Location: LBC
4,155 posts, read 4,489,878 times
Reputation: 3543
Quote:
Originally Posted by HenryAlan View Post
Okay, regarding city slicker and country bumkin. I'll admit, I used the latter term, and it was in direct response to earlier lines about city slickers. I don't really see people in such terms, just wanted to illustrate something that was already happening in this thread by some of the posters arguing against the city. My own feelings are expressed in a few follow-up posts, which are that city and rural are both important.

But I need to start insisting on some facts and evidence from the folks talking about feeding us and such, as if that is solely manifested by the good work and roads out in the farm belt. If cities didn't produce massive quantities of economic activity, and house millions of people, nobody would buy the food. So, I'm not sure what point is supposed to be made by this line, other than to confirm that rural areas depend on urban areas for roads and livelihood. I don't see any of the ardent city-bashers recognizing the obvious corollary, though, which is that in order for this to happen, cities need to thrive. Part of the recipe for urban success is good, reliable, and available public transporation.

Let's build the roads to transport the food and other natural resources, but let's also build the subways needed by the people buying the food.

On the ethanol thing, not at all sure what that is supposed to mean, but you do realize, don't you, that ethanol is an example of a huge subsidy to rural communities. Right?
A subsidy of $17 billion between 2005 and 2009 alone:
http://www.ewg.org/files/EWG-corn-et...y-security.pdf
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-05-2012, 01:28 PM
 
Location: Florida
398 posts, read 622,506 times
Reputation: 261
Quote:
Originally Posted by HenryAlan View Post
Sounds good, looking forward to seeing the facts!

Relative to population, they do none of this. Of course, there are distortions. A factory, for example, creates pollution. But not all cities are industrial, and not all industry is exclusive to urbanity. There are plenty of rural smokestacks belching polution.

These things that you like would not exit without the city.

Cities are self selecting, self organizing. You'd have a point regarding Rousseau and Jefferson if the urban form was being forced on you out in the country, or if you were being coerced into moving to an urban location. Where is this happening?
Things I like do not need a city to exist, what does a city provide great works of art, writing, music except monied patrons. People would still create these things regardless if people paid them or not.

The urban form HAS been forced upon people b/c the market prices and untethered population growth, war, etc. These were manipulated by those in power in the cities so they can't subsist on life like that anymore, where as westward expansion, they virtually gave away land. You could go plot land, own land without excessive taxes to the government, etc. Basically more freedom.

Sure this isn't the form of the cities, but cities are usually dystopian before they become more utopian.

Anyway, I have a feeling we aren't going to see eye to eye, that is why I mentioned where my ideologies come from.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-05-2012, 03:05 PM
 
Location: Chicago
1,312 posts, read 1,584,067 times
Reputation: 1487
Quote:
Originally Posted by CArizona View Post
Why do so many "wars" go on between "city people" and "country people?"
Here's the thing:

City folk will "survive", unless people plan on nuclear bombs being dropped on the economic, cultural, and business centers of America. In which case "cities" in America (the places in America that are known for being 'American') are gone. For a smaller scale example, look at NYC.


As long as people drive 15 more miles than they NEED TO, city "folk" will harbor some ill-will because the people that want to drive a 8 MPG Hummer everywhere will DECREASE the oil supply, which means higher fruit and veggie prices for people who don't even drive.

Yeah, it's your "right" to "pay" for what you use, but it makes prices higher for everyone else who has retrained from excesses just because "they can".

That's why people who take trains and busses have a disdain for people who do "donuts" in the parking lot of the high school parking lot.


THEY'RE WASTING GAS THAT COULD BE USED TO MOVE FOOD, OR MOVE SUPPLIES TO THE TROOPS!!!!!!!!!!!



I do without so America can have more later, but other people think that means they can use more because I'm not using as much.

So much for a dictionary definition of "Conservative".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-05-2012, 03:27 PM
 
Location: Southwest Desert
4,166 posts, read 5,389,821 times
Reputation: 3538
When my sons were small and they got into a "fight" I'd ask them why they were "fighting." Each one would insist that the other one "started it."...I'd hear things like: "He stold my Tonka truck." Or: "He said I was stupid." And on and on and on...They would both insist that the other one was "at fault!" They didn't want to be "friends" and try to work out calm and peaceful solutions to their problems or try to "make-up." They both wanted to "stay mad" and keep blaming each other...Sadly this is how political parties operate today. Groups with opposing views start "wars" too and "launch attacks" on the other "side." And it all goes on and on and on...I was so happy when my sons grew-up and learned how to settle their differences in more mature and constructive ways. (Versus playing non-stop "blame games" that always gave me a headache!)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-05-2012, 03:51 PM
 
Location: Pennsylvania
1,392 posts, read 1,278,079 times
Reputation: 936
Quote:
Originally Posted by A2DAC1985 View Post
Here's the thing:As long as people drive 15 more miles than they NEED TO, city "folk" will harbor some ill-will because the people that want to drive a 8 MPG Hummer everywhere will DECREASE the oil supply, which means higher fruit and veggie prices for people who don't even drive.
I'm sorry but this is dumb. People who live in rural areas tend not to buy Hummers that is what you see people living in suburbs and in cities drive around in. People in rural areas are likely to own pickup truck because of it's versatility not for the "bling" factor which is what you see with people owning a Hummer.

Quote:
Yeah, it's your "right" to "pay" for what you use, but it makes prices higher for everyone else who has retrained from excesses just because "they can".
The reason why food costs so much in cities is because of higher property taxes, lack of actual grocery stories, and urban sprawl with suburbs.

Quote:
That's why people who take trains and busses have a disdain for people who do "donuts" in the parking lot of the high school parking lot.
People have fun doing donuts in parking lot is considered fun to a lot of people. Especially when your young and want to own a cool fast car that you can't afford.

Quote:
THEY'RE WASTING GAS THAT COULD BE USED TO MOVE FOOD, OR MOVE SUPPLIES TO THE TROOPS!!!!!!!!!!!
Yes, those pesky kids that rarely do a burnout use more fuel then what city or rural residents use to heat their homes or apartments with.

Quote:
I do without so America can have more later, but other people think that means they can use more because I'm not using as much.

So much for a dictionary definition of "Conservative".
Your just ranting now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-06-2012, 11:07 AM
 
Location: Chicago
1,312 posts, read 1,584,067 times
Reputation: 1487
Quote:
Originally Posted by cwa1984 View Post
I'm sorry but this is dumb. People who live in rural areas tend not to buy Hummers that is what you see people living in suburbs and in cities drive around in. People in rural areas are likely to own pickup truck because of it's versatility not for the "bling" factor which is what you see with people owning a Hummer.



The reason why food costs so much in cities is because of higher property taxes, lack of actual grocery stories, and urban sprawl with suburbs.



People have fun doing donuts in parking lot is considered fun to a lot of people. Especially when your young and want to own a cool fast car that you can't afford.



Yes, those pesky kids that rarely do a burnout use more fuel then what city or rural residents use to heat their homes or apartments with.



Your just ranting now.

You know, you may be right about the Hummer thing. In the country it's a big truck with an even bigger exhaust. Do some people actually use trucks for their versatility? Of course. In true rural areas, even more so. But I have met plenty of people that hardly, if ever, use the truck for that versatility factor.

And you really think there's a lack of grocery stores in cities? If you do, I can only conclude you have never lived in a city before, because if you did you would know that is flat out untrue. Do taxes play a part? Sure. But the cost to get the stuff there is always fluctuating. Taxes don't get raised or lowered on a daily, weekly, monthly, or maybe even yearly basis.

As for donuts in the parking lot you're saying, to me at least, that "Doing fun stuff = Good". Just because something is "fun" doesn't mean it is beneficial, fiscally responsible, or a net benefit for anyone else that is not partaking in the "fun"

So doing burnouts, if even rarely, is just as gas efficient as driving a car in a more restrained way is? Yeah, I'm not buying that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top