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.
Don't move to a small town - they suck. Don't take my word for it, just look at the national statistics. From life expectancy to education rates, small towns are losing ground compared to metropolitan areas. For years I lived in a large town, and while there were many things I disliked, I was always able to make money and find friends. In a small town, there are really no opportunities for people, and from what I have seen, small towns are dominated by people who could not make it in large towns.
My next move will be to a suburb, which is probably the best you can do, as large urban cores are quality of life problematic, and small towns are in decline.
Shortly after I posted this, I came across a Washington Post article which clearly shows a groundbreaking study where life expectancy has plummeted in many rural areas for whites especially. It has not in urban areas. I take no pride in this revelation, as many people idealize small towns. The reality is small towns are not the place to be in this nation. Sad but true.
Last edited by yuhjolkas; 04-10-2016 at 05:40 PM..
Fewer viable places of employment, locally, and even fewer positions appropriate for those with higher education are certainly obstacles in rural/small town living. Especially if those areas are significantly isolated out of reasonable commuting distance from larger population centers, and/or if one is unable to telecommute or otherwise work remotely.
Healthcare access in these same isolated rural and small communities poses a similar significant obstacle, as small local hospitals are largely no longer considered self-sustaining, and if they exist at all, operate solely as triage units from which people must be transported to better equipped facilities. So people with significant health issues can find themselves at a dangerous disadvantage in such areas.
The rest, though, sorry, just sounds like an axe to grind.
I grew up in a rural community, was educated in small towns (pop 10k and under, sometimes well under), and have lived as an adult in extremely large metros, midsize metros, and suburbs of a variety of sizes. I've kind of experienced the full range, though I've never lived full-time in a rural locale with seriously restricted access (i.e. Alaskan bush or similar). Each size of community has its pros and cons, and whether or not each is a nice place to live is dependent wholly upon individual taste and priorities.
Rural America, once the powerhouse of independence and prodigious production of food, has been eclipsed by pressures from socialism, government, and even the money based economy.
Subsidies of wasteful forms of transportation will soon be cut, if not eliminated, causing more dislocation and chaos. Unless a new, cheap form of transportation is discovered, electric traction rail will become the dominant land transport.
Let’s extrapolate forward from that position, and adjust expectations accordingly.
What will be at risk or abandoned in the coming years and decades - - -
[] High cost (in fuel or resources) lifestyles and occupations that cannot be sustained :
__ Automobile use will drop by 80% or more;
__ Strip malls and shopping malls will vanish;
__ Suburbia will become poorer and poorer and then abandoned;
__ Highways, bridges and roads will begin to decay and become unsafe or unusable;
__ With the end of suburban sprawl, compact villages, towns, and cities will become the desirable mode (Assuming that people get beyond the limits of usury and the money shortage and can restore prosperity);
__ Isolated rural developments will become very unpleasant. Insular family farm clusters may have to be merged and transformed into agricultural villages, where the farmers commute to their fields. (A common practice in most of the world).
Therefore, to preserve personal liberty, the freedom to travel, and to do so at minimal cost, one may seek to relocate where one will have access to efficient transportation, and thus access to trade goods, as well as high density population. Unfortunately, most development since the 1950's has been automobile-centric, and it may take another 50 years to untangle the mess that policy has made.
Suggestions:
[] Look for “sleepy†little towns, such as those on moribund (or abandoned) rail lines, that will become re-invigorated once rail starts to dominate again.
[] Find spots along existing sustainable transportation corridors - navigable waterways, canals, rivers, rail lines, and coasts.
[] Join cooperative communities and construct new compact villages (fortified?).
[] Close proximity to food production is a desirable feature.
[] Access to sustainable power is a desirable feature (hydropower, etc).
[] Construct or adapt an Autonomous / independent house, that will be comfortable and functional if power, communications and resupply are cut off. Disaster resistance is an added plus.
The rest, though, sorry, just sounds like an axe to grind.
I grew up in a rural community, was educated in small towns (pop 10k and under, sometimes well under), and have lived as an adult in extremely large metros, midsize metros, and suburbs of a variety of sizes. I've kind of experienced the full range, though I've never lived full-time in a rural locale with seriously restricted access (i.e. Alaskan bush or similar). Each size of community has its pros and cons, and whether or not each is a nice place to live is dependent wholly upon individual taste and priorities.
No, there is hard data that life expectancy itself, as in how long you will actually live, has decline by large measures in rural America. It has to do with drug epidemics and lack of healthcare outcomes.
It's no longer subjective, in fact it should probably be a campaign issue.
Rural America, once the powerhouse of independence and prodigious production of food, has been eclipsed by pressures from socialism, government, and even the money based economy.
Subsidies of wasteful forms of transportation will soon be cut, if not eliminated, causing more dislocation and chaos. Unless a new, cheap form of transportation is discovered, electric traction rail will become the dominant land transport.
Let’s extrapolate forward from that position, and adjust expectations accordingly.
What will be at risk or abandoned in the coming years and decades - - -
[] High cost (in fuel or resources) lifestyles and occupations that cannot be sustained :[INDENT]__ Automobile use will drop by 80% or more;
__ Strip malls and shopping malls will vanish;
__ Suburbia will become poorer and poorer and then abandoned;
__ Highways, bridges and roads will begin to decay and become unsafe or unusable;
__ With the end of suburban sprawl, compact villages, towns, and cities will become the desirable mode (Assuming that people get beyond the limits of usury and the money shortage and can restore prosperity);
__ Isolated rural developments will become very unpleasant. Insular family farm clusters may have to be merged and transformed into agricultural villages, where the farmers commute to their fields. (A common practice in most of the world).
[/INDENT]Therefore, to preserve personal liberty, the freedom to travel, and to do so at minimal cost, one may seek to relocate where one will have access to efficient transportation, and thus access to trade goods, as well as high density population. Unfortunately, most development since the 1950's has been automobile-centric, and it may take another 50 years to untangle the mess that policy has made.
Suggestions:[INDENT][] Look for “sleepy” little towns, such as those on moribund (or abandoned) rail lines, that will become re-invigorated once rail starts to dominate again.
[] Find spots along existing sustainable transportation corridors - navigable waterways, canals, rivers, rail lines, and coasts.
[] Join cooperative communities and construct new compact villages (fortified?).
[] Close proximity to food production is a desirable feature.
[] Access to sustainable power is a desirable feature (hydropower, etc).
[] Construct or adapt an Autonomous / independent house, that will be comfortable and functional if power, communications and resupply are cut off. Disaster resistance is an added plus.
[/INDENT]
You bring up a good point about the costs of fuel. I can also say that internet access is another significant problem.
Rural America is a nice place to "get away" for a while, but I cannot imagine it's a smart choice for day-to-day living for most folks. And that's probably why cities are growing larger and larger. It isn't because people like concrete.
You bring up a good point about the costs of fuel. I can also say that internet access is another significant problem.
Rural America is a nice place to "get away" for a while, but I cannot imagine it's a smart choice for day-to-day living for most folks. And that's probably why cities are growing larger and larger. It isn't because people like concrete.
Actually, the spread of larger cities are moving IN the direction of smaller, surrounding towns. Where I live, a lot of people live an hour away from the big city only because they love the smaller populace. Tons of commuters where I live....and now we're growing.
More and more people who are moving from the city to be in suburbia, even if it's an hour commute.
... Wow! ... Now I'm sorry I read this whole thread!
DW and I plan to retire to a small town (or small city), to get away from all the hustle-and-bustle of "Big City, America" ... Some of y'all (including 'jetgraphics') make the future appear to be completely 3rd-world - no one's going to be able to do anything; no one'll have anything other than their hut ... And, unless you're located on a rail line, a canal, river or other body of water, you won't be able to leave(!) ... Seriously??!
Has someone been studying this? Are there published reports of gloom-and-doom for America(?) - Elections excepted, of course.
I've read a lot of discourses on city life, small town life and rural living, over the years. I don't believe I've ever read anything like what's published on this thread. Where do y'all get this stuff?
Maybe DW and I oughta just "end it" right now, huh? Then we won't have to be faced with all the "Bee - Ess" y'all are shoveling!
...
Don't move to a small town - they suck. Don't take my word for it, just look at the national statistics. From life expectancy to education rates, small towns are losing ground compared to metropolitan areas. For years I lived in a large town, and while there were many things I disliked, I was always able to make money and find friends. In a small town, there are really no opportunities for people, and from what I have seen, small towns are dominated by people who could not make it in large towns.
My next move will be to a suburb, which is probably the best you can do, as large urban cores are quality of life problematic, and small towns are in decline.
Shortly after I posted this, I came across a Washington Post article which clearly shows a groundbreaking study where life expectancy has plummeted in many rural areas for whites especially. It has not in urban areas. I take no pride in this revelation, as many people idealize small towns. The reality is small towns are not the place to be in this nation. Sad but true.
The link to the WP article is in my thread "Death in a Small Town".
... Wow! ... Now I'm sorry I read this whole thread!
DW and I plan to retire to a small town (or small city), to get away from all the hustle-and-bustle of "Big City, America" ... Some of y'all (including 'jetgraphics') make the future appear to be completely 3rd-world - no one's going to be able to do anything; no one'll have anything other than their hut ... And, unless you're located on a rail line, a canal, river or other body of water, you won't be able to leave(!) ... Seriously??!
Has someone been studying this? Are there published reports of gloom-and-doom for America(?) - Elections excepted, of course.
I've read a lot of discourses on city life, small town life and rural living, over the years. I don't believe I've ever read anything like what's published on this thread. Where do y'all get this stuff?
Maybe DW and I oughta just "end it" right now, huh? Then we won't have to be faced with all the "Bee - Ess" y'all are shoveling!
...
[] If population keeps doubling on a 50 year cycle, the current population of 320 million will rise to 640 million in 2066, and 1280 million by 2116. (Even if first world countries' birthrates are down, other nations are exporting their surplus, who are emigrating to 1st world countries)
[] With four times the population, comes the need for four times as much food production (or imports).
[] The most efficient form of land transport is steel wheel on steel rail. (20:1 advantage over pneumatic tire on pavement) With a fourfold increase in transportation of passengers and cargo, the obvious choice was, is and will be rail. Highways cannot be ever widened to meet the load. Air travel is far too expensive in terms of fuel consumed (as well as tax subsidies).
[] Four times the demand for fossil fuels will also impact the economy. Whether or not the USA has sufficient resources, we shall see.
The bottom line - common sense suggests that conservation, frugality, efficiency and resilience will become the watchword for the remainder of the 21st century. If that is "third world" then that is what America will become.
Being prepared by building an autonomous disaster resistant superinsulated domicile avoids the problems associated with natural disasters, interruption in resupply, and distribution of utilities. Depending on your climate, your house had better remain functional and comfortable without utilities, for the short or the long term. That poses a problem since "modern" house builders rely on technology and power to avoid the expense. But that is a short term solution, that won't work over the long term. Just imagine the folks who had to endure without electricity in the hot/humid south after major tropical storms took out the grid. Or imagine the folks who get snowed in, and lose power.
My personal preference is for folks to form a cooperative village, preferably walled, to minimize risk and enhance security, just in case. Based on Dunbar's number, a village of 150 - 300 is about optimum.
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.
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.
... Seriously??! ...
... Now I'm sorry I read this whole thread!
