U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Rural and Small Town Living
 [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 07-30-2011, 08:12 PM
 
Location: The Woods
17,098 posts, read 22,617,206 times
Reputation: 9375

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by mysticaltyger View Post
In many ways, large cities are actually MORE energy efficient than rural areas.

New York City is the most energy efficient city in the US. Why? People there live in the most energy efficient homes you could have--high rise apartments & condos. People in NYC also don't drive anywhere near as much as in the rest of America. Walking, biking, and mass transit are much more energy efficient than private automobiles.
Those big cities as they exist today can only exist because of cheap, abundant petroleum, outside food sources shipped long distance, etc. They won't last.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-31-2011, 12:34 AM
 
373 posts, read 555,990 times
Reputation: 243
Default There is no Health Care Problem in Rural America IF>>>

There is no Health Care Problem in Rural America IF>>> you don't need Health Care. The American Healcare systme is great at treating people for accidents or burns.

But for illness or chronic issues. The system is of dubious value.

At least the local taxpayers may not be on the hook for recreational healthcare in rural areas where Medical Care is closing down.

Health is too valuable an asset to trust to the medicrats. No hospital is something I could roll the dice on. It could mean more reasonable land values.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-31-2011, 01:02 AM
 
26,817 posts, read 29,241,900 times
Reputation: 26048
Quote:
Originally Posted by arctichomesteader View Post
Those big cities as they exist today can only exist because of cheap, abundant petroleum, outside food sources shipped long distance, etc. They won't last.
You missed the point completely. Those big cities actually use LESS petroleum on a per capita basis than rural areas do.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-31-2011, 01:52 AM
 
Location: Cushing OK
14,547 posts, read 17,914,567 times
Reputation: 16806
Quote:
Originally Posted by mysticaltyger View Post
You missed the point completely. Those big cities actually use LESS petroleum on a per capita basis than rural areas do.
Question is, do you want to live there? Some have been stuck in cities or suburbs to work in their fields, but when they retire they don't have to. Consider a family member of mine is awaiting the closing of escrow on a 2 be one bath house in the town I live in for 18k. Nice yard, right next to downtown, even a cellar. She was up in oregon but its very expensive there. If you can get housing cheaper, the general costs of living are cheaper and maybe you'd like quiet over stuff to do. Maybe crowded cities are more efficent, but if its not a place that you like living it doesn't matter.

I grew up in the suburbs, and moved to a socal city which actually has an identity of itself, but then it got to be just part of the constant glut of houses and people. It still has that identity but it was too crowded for me. I like that this town is small, that beyond is open land and that the whole pace is slow to sometimes a ridiculas degree. I've warned people from Califorina that move here to be advised that 'hurry' is not a word here. But you know what? you get used to it and like it a lot.

I don't see why we have to argue over what is the 'best' place to live. Why not recognize that ALL of them are to someone.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-31-2011, 11:05 AM
 
Location: Land of Free Johnson-Weld-2016
6,473 posts, read 14,170,610 times
Reputation: 6440
Quote:
Originally Posted by ognend View Post
Doctors born in United States want to earn $400K per year, drive a Mercedes, have a trophy wife and vacation in Hawaii. They don't want to stay in some tiny rural town where they'll make $50K per year. Medical school nowadays is not about medicine anymore, it is about management and business. You are lucky if your doctor gives you more than 10 minutes of his precious time. It used to be that the doctor would come to your house because part of taking care of a patient and figuring out what the problem is, is seeing where and how they live. Today's a**hole doctors are too stupid, lazy and disinterested for all that. I hope I never end up in their hands as the vast majority of them are completely incompetent and borderline dangerous.

My $.02
OD
That's true for SOME doctors, but there are a few who don't make that much. I think the basic problem is racism in the US. I noticed the black GPs are generally pushed into working in locations serving black populations, and it may be dangerous for them to work in rural areas.

That's because a lot of the population in some rural areas are racist and uneducated, but also armed to the teeth. I think the doctors would have a difficult time being safe and also accepted by the local population. The pay you get for being a GP and working with a disadvantaged popopulation is similar whether or not it is rural or urban, but I think that's one of the big reasons there are fewer American-born doctors available to work there.

It is probably also cheaper to live in a rurual area, but if safety and quality of life are at stake as it may be in some of the mountainous rural areas in the East, then of course a lot of doctors are going to say "No way." It is probably simply easier to get foreign doctors to accept the positions.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-31-2011, 01:28 PM
 
Location: SW Missouri
15,853 posts, read 30,807,731 times
Reputation: 22404
Quote:
Originally Posted by mysticaltyger View Post
You missed the point completely. Those big cities actually use LESS petroleum on a per capita basis than rural areas do.
I have a lot of trouble believing that statement. Rurally, I can drive 30 miles in 45 minutes and stop twice for stop signs. Urbanly, I can drive 15 miles in 45 minutes and spend *most* of that time at traffic lights burning fuel. It seem far more efficient to me to actually be IN MOTION when running my engine and burning petroleum.

The figure that you are quoting is of course, including the people who ride public transit and walk, or bicycle to work. BUT if you take those people OUT of the equation and strictly compare apples to apples, I seriously DOUBT if drivers in the city use less fuel per capital than drivers in rural environments.

20yrsinBranson
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-31-2011, 04:45 PM
 
Location: The Woods
17,098 posts, read 22,617,206 times
Reputation: 9375
Quote:
Originally Posted by mysticaltyger View Post
You missed the point completely. Those big cities actually use LESS petroleum on a per capita basis than rural areas do.
But they can't exist without it, whereas, rural areas can.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-01-2011, 11:26 AM
 
Location: 3rd Rock fts
748 posts, read 976,791 times
Reputation: 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by flyonpa
If the rural area have high speed access, I could work from there. But not sure I would want to live in a "die'ing" town. Schools close (or already have). No where to get food/fuel etc. So you wind up going to a town that does, but how soon till it dies? At some point you are driving 1hr+ to go food shopping.
Good idea!

You don’t need population growth IMO; just fast & efficient movement of people in/out of the small town(s) via shuttle-type high speed rail. This low footprint approach would benefit local business/jobs. The key is to keep the local expenses stable & low; no reason/need for Municipalities to tax.

Maybe the Urban & Rural population could start learning how to rub elbows without all the animosity toward each other? The Urban folk get to enjoy the get away/quaintness of life & the Rural folk get to benefit from local business activity without the hindrance of disorganized growth.

Of course there is no immediate, mega profit for the entity running the modern rail but the quality/balance of life to the citizenry would improve.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-01-2011, 02:22 PM
 
Location: MN
378 posts, read 612,201 times
Reputation: 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by mysticaltyger View Post
In many ways, large cities are actually MORE energy efficient than rural areas.

New York City is the most energy efficient city in the US. Why? People there live in the most energy efficient homes you could have--high rise apartments & condos. People in NYC also don't drive anywhere near as much as in the rest of America. Walking, biking, and mass transit are much more energy efficient than private automobiles.
It's an issue of availability, not efficiency. Large cities need to import energy and food produced elsewhere. If these supply chains disintegrate, cities are screwed. In that scenario, it doesn't matter how efficient they are if they can't produce what they consume.

I'm just clarifying the issue, not claiming that a systematic supply chain failure is actually likely. That's an argument for others to take up.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-01-2011, 06:53 PM
 
Location: MMU->ABE->ATL->ASH
9,172 posts, read 17,551,897 times
Reputation: 10040
DSO.

I was refering to High Speed Data Access, (BroadBand Internet). Most rural area if they have HS internet its limited to the area in town near the Phone switch. If you are more then few miles out of town, you are on Sat Intenet (Not that fast Upload/Download speeds restricted).

Hight speed Rail will never come to small town, Most large city pairs cannot support HSR connections.
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 > General Forums > Rural and Small Town Living
Similar Threads
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