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.
Once upon a time employers looked for things like the ability to set up "mills" and other capital intensive workplaces based on the proximity of the site to things that could be made more valuable through manufacturing, refining, or similar "material focused" operations.
The continuing shift toward "knowledge" as the primary driver of "value add" means that employers have focused on places with the kinds of human capital that adds value by being more creative / smarter. That presents a situation where people with traits or being curious / intelligent thrive. Such people tend to be driven by activities that fall into the category of "culturally enriching" much more so than folks who are content to merely have high wages. The pattern of such things is pretty clear - knowledge driven employers need smart / creative employees who in turn spend their money on things that are more about enhanced experience than mere material goods. It is not a "build it and they will come" situation so much as an evolving cycle that does not have a real beginning / end but instead tends to be largely reinforcing. The caveat is that as wealth increases so too does competition for employees and all the things that employees spend their salaries on -- thus as Manhattan or Silicon Valley gets more expensive there is a tendency for folks to find substitutes that offer some similarities, which is how Brooklyn or Seattle offer good alternatives. As those alternative places get even more costly there are additional expansion pressures but they tend to have similar patterns of urbanism / concentrated access.
Funny thing is there were LOTS of folks who thought the expansion of things like higher speed network connectivity and virtual workplaces it might provide a lifeline for more rural areas. What those folks failed to account for was not just the "work" environment, but what happens "off hours". There needs to be certain kinds of people to support the kinds of restaurants, cocktail bars, and shops that are interesting. Otherwise the idea of eating out at a Dennys, drinking only nationally distributed bottled beer and shopping only at Walmart runs smack into the idea of being "creative'...
Well that's ridiculous. I guarantee you there are a LOT of things I find WAY more interesting than cocktail bars, restaurants and shops. Your pejorative way of looking at chain stores and restaurants has NOTHING to do with creativity. Stores do not make or impede one's creativity. That has got to be the most classist bigotry I've seen in awhile.
I was a software engineer. I have plenty of education and creativity. Boring people need nightclubs and fancy shops. People LACKING in creativity can't find anything better to do with their time than to drink and spend money.
The size of the town isn't going to prevent someone who is ACTUALLY creative from finding interesting things to do - lots more interesting than circulating through a meat market of drunks looking for whatever people who do that are looking for.
Not sure how small "small towns" are to you but one thing is to market yourself. I think of towns with fewer than 10,000 people to be small; maybe you won't. But growing up, Lititz, PA was just another old Amish town on our way from Harrisburg to Lancaster. Now it's a little hipster enclave that gets a lot of press. Not for everyone, but certainly they are surviving and gentrifying. A good webpage and some 21st century businesses can do wonders.
I have 2 quick questions that experts on gentrification and revitalizing towns can help me with. From what I am seeing, small towns are dying out at an alarming rate, my home town of 2000, had a population of 3000 in the 90s, and I wouldnt be surprised in the population is 1500 in the 2020 census, people are leaving this small town just like they are everywhere. I can't blame people, there are no jobs around here and nothing to do. I dont see people giving a crap about living here unless some jobs appear. But why would any employer come here if the place is so boring? Its sort of a circular problem. So I think this place will continue to decline until it fails to exist like other small towns around the country. Has anyone ever heard of a small town revitalizing without jobs opening near by? Declining neighborhoods in big cities will gentrify because jobs and entertainment in the area create a demand for housing. If the trend keeps up, small towns will die out completely. Is there any hope for small towns in the future?
Pretty much if your small town is not commutable to a major metro area, you won't live to see anything involving the words revival, gentrification, or renaissance.
Barring already-established vacation destinations with resorts and local establishments, I don't see anything new popping up in the way of the magnitude of job creation that would allow a small rural "burnout" town to stand on its own again.
You might end up with a tech company tapping a small no-man's-land as the site for its next datacenter. But these buildings are not tech hubs and are often staffed minimally.
Both R&D and manufacturing firms alike tend to gravitate towards large talent pools. Other industries will fill in as the population grows enough to support it.
The type of large investments selected for isolated properties don't usually create that many jobs. This has a lot to do with the difficulty and resources involved in keeping it staffed and operational. Otherwise, who wouldn't want to take advantage of cheap real estate and transplant everyone for a turn-key solution?
1.) They don't fill as fast as if the jobs were offered in a large metro
2.) Same goes for back-filling vacancies when someone leaves
3.) Greater chance of turnover working for attractive company but in a desolate area
4.) Even if they did, the success and stability of the new residents would have the same volatility as the "mill towns" that littered NC and other southern states in the early- and mid-twentieth century.
I have 2 quick questions that experts on gentrification and revitalizing towns can help me with. From what I am seeing, small towns are dying out at an alarming rate, my home town of 2000, had a population of 3000 in the 90s, and I wouldnt be surprised in the population is 1500 in the 2020 census, people are leaving this small town just like they are everywhere. I can't blame people, there are no jobs around here and nothing to do. I dont see people giving a crap about living here unless some jobs appear. But why would any employer come here if the place is so boring? Its sort of a circular problem. So I think this place will continue to decline until it fails to exist like other small towns around the country. Has anyone ever heard of a small town revitalizing without jobs opening near by? Declining neighborhoods in big cities will gentrify because jobs and entertainment in the area create a demand for housing. If the trend keeps up, small towns will die out completely. Is there any hope for small towns in the future?
Well, as long as people keep having children, more and more land will be consumed by housing and the stores needed to provide amenities.
When people have kids, the population and housing numbers rise at a fast rate. Where there used to be 10 houses with 20 people (10 couples), there becomes 70 houses housing 140 people from the original couple to their grandkids, assuming all the kids get spouses and they have on average 2 kids each couple & they stay in the area. They have to live somewhere. And there will need to be more grocery stores, retail outlets, medical providers, and other amenities to provide their needs.
Eventually, most small towns will disappear, but not in my lifetime. It will still take time. But because of population growth, it's inevitable. The Amazon Forest will be consumed, the National Parks will be used for housing (we've already started using them for mining and other destructive businesses). Any attempts to curb population is met by certain groups with anger, because of religious or economic reasons. More people = more profit for some.
Park City, Utah is one example, and it is all tourist-based.
Park City was a thriving silver mining town in the 1800s and dwindled to very little by the 1950s and early 1960s. During the 1930s, the WPA cleared some terrain to create ski trails, and its first ski lift was installed shortly after WWII. What would become Deer Valley started to grow; a second ski area (now Park City Mountain Resort) was opened in the early 1960s and a third (Canyons Ski Resort) opened in the late 1960s.
Park City's population is under 8000. Governmental entities (city & school district) are the major employer, of course, followed by fairly low-wage hourly ski resort seasonal employees (most of whom are from South America on a special visa). Hospitality workers & jobs (hotels, restaurants) are plentiful.
While a fairly small town, the influx of tourists supports the economy. During the Sundance Film Festival (HQ'd in Park City), the population can swell to 70,000. As a tourist destination with world class skiing, there are many luxury homes (10,000 - 20,000+ sf). There is a scarcity of housing available for the low-wager hourly season employees (ski lift operators, food service employees at ski lodges, etc).
High property values coupled with high property taxes on non-primary residences support a fairly good public infrastructure, including free public transportation (many electric buses) and a wide variety of ongoing community events, shared electric powered bicycles, etc.
People only half-joke that you can't swing a ski pole without hitting 3 real estate agents. Depending on whose numbers you believe, there are somewhere between 1200 and 2000+ real estate agents here, although most of them are not very active.
In aging population Japan, where 1 million elderly are dying off every year, and not being replaced due to the low fertility rate, and with services in small towns evaporating, particularly health services, they have no choice, in many cases, but to flee to Tokyo, which is growing. Many other countries, with a huge aging population, will follow suit.
I'd be more concerned about the aging infrastructure in small towns, not enough tax revenue to replace it, as well as roads, streets, sidewalks.
Older folks and possibly families with young school age children may prefer a small town over a big city. Less crime, people are friendlier, peace and tranquility. IMO
Peace and tranquility? All it takes is some insensitive soul with a loud thumping boom car and there goes your peace and tranquility! And you can have a neighbor from hell anywhere in the world!
Well that's ridiculous. I guarantee you there are a LOT of things I find WAY more interesting than cocktail bars, restaurants and shops. Your pejorative way of looking at chain stores and restaurants has NOTHING to do with creativity. Stores do not make or impede one's creativity. That has got to be the most classist bigotry I've seen in awhile.
I was a software engineer. I have plenty of education and creativity. Boring people need nightclubs and fancy shops. People LACKING in creativity can't find anything better to do with their time than to drink and spend money.
The size of the town isn't going to prevent someone who is ACTUALLY creative from finding interesting things to do - lots more interesting than circulating through a meat market of drunks looking for whatever people who do that are looking for.
But you are a special person.
Sadly, many people who have options in life chose the option of living in places where Walmart isn't the main attraction.
Speaking of circulating through a meat market of drunks, have you ever been to a bar in a small town?
Pretty much if your small town is not commutable to a major metro area, you won't live to see anything involving the words revival, gentrification, or renaissance.
Barring already-established vacation destinations with resorts and local establishments, I don't see anything new popping up in the way of the magnitude of job creation that would allow a small rural "burnout" town to stand on its own again.
You might end up with a tech company tapping a small no-man's-land as the site for its next datacenter. But these buildings are not tech hubs and are often staffed minimally.
Both R&D and manufacturing firms alike tend to gravitate towards large talent pools. Other industries will fill in as the population grows enough to support it.
The type of large investments selected for isolated properties don't usually create that many jobs. This has a lot to do with the difficulty and resources involved in keeping it staffed and operational. Otherwise, who wouldn't want to take advantage of cheap real estate and transplant everyone for a turn-key solution?
1.) They don't fill as fast as if the jobs were offered in a large metro
2.) Same goes for back-filling vacancies when someone leaves
3.) Greater chance of turnover working for attractive company but in a desolate area
4.) Even if they did, the success and stability of the new residents would have the same volatility as the "mill towns" that littered NC and other southern states in the early- and mid-twentieth century.
Pity.
Yep.
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.
