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.
People better care about politics—that's how we separate friends from enemies.
Starving people do not ask about the politics of the person offering them food. If I need brain surgery and have an opportunity to have the best in the state, I am not going to ask or care about his party affiliation. Again, that is a luxury, reserved for those who feel they have options and choices.
I also don't look at everyone from another party as an "enemy". I think that's a bigger problem than the discussion here.
So much of this thread has been pointing out problems with rural areas and why they cannot be prosperous.
1: Most of these posts say Internet is the big problem. Satellite Internet, is available at acceptable speeds, anywhere in the United States, no matter where you are located. It can also add on good Phone service, via Internet. And it can also include satellite T.V. If for some reason you want it to appear you are located in major cities, you get satellite internet phone service with a number for that city at no extra cost.
2: Crime statistics for most parts of the rural areas, are far below what they are in any major city.
I have seen it discussed a lot in our local papers, 'leaders' in many nearby towns WANT to grow their towns to convert them to urban. They think that by doubling or tripling their town population the tax revenue generated would be enough money to fix all their problems.
My state is not in the rust-belt. It is not a coal-mining town. For over a century this area had a strong timber industry, but now all our mills have shutdown. The Canadian timber industry is subsidized which makes their lumber cheaper than our lumber. I live in forest, but I can not buy local lumber. It simply does not exist.
Wages are low and jobs have been scarce, for 20 years now.
But to say that we 'need help', I am not sure we do.
Young adults [if they are smart] leave this state to seek their fortunes in the cities.
Retirees [like me] migrate here because the COL is low. If wages went much higher, I would not be able to support myself here.
That does NOT mean I 'need' any help. I am fine.
Most people here are fine, or else why did they move here?
You can't seem to see beyond your front door. Your answer is for all the young family people to leave and have rural areas just for retirees? What happens when all the retirees die? What happens when the old people need medical care and can't drive?
What would you say to those in coal towns or former factory/mill towns?
So much of this thread has been pointing out problems with rural areas and why they cannot be prosperous.
1: Most of these posts say Internet is the big problem. Satellite Internet, is available at acceptable speeds, anywhere in the United States, no matter where you are located. It can also add on good Phone service, via Internet. And it can also include satellite T.V. If for some reason you want it to appear you are located in major cities, you get satellite internet phone service with a number for that city at no extra cost.
2: Crime statistics for most parts of the rural areas, are far below what they are in any major city.
No one is saying they can't be prosperous. Just that they need solutions to be so. Before it got derailed by people insisting all of rural America is doing just fine and getting offended by any notion to the contrary, the discussion had been about things that might help these areas prosper again, such as green energy jobs that maybe could replace lost coal jobs. The internet was brought up by a poster who stated that lack of infrastructure (including high speed internet) might be a problem in attracting new industries to these areas.
Don't think Big Business is heading to McDowell County or anyplace of the like anytime soon, I don't care if they mfg. Widgets or Solar Panels, there's a reason Amazon is setting up shop in Long Island, NY, you guessed it, huge tax incentives, a young, ready, educated workforce is within easy reach, as well as the night life is within reach for those younguns.
I'm within reach of McDowell, my geography is reserved mostly for Cattle, Artists that outgrew the city, some retirees, and folks traveling daily to the big city chasing the buck.
As I mentioned earlier, if the local politicians can't turn it around...then who?
You can't seem to see beyond your front door. Your answer is for all the young family people to leave and have rural areas just for retirees? What happens when all the retirees die? What happens when the old people need medical care and can't drive?
What would you say to those in coal towns or former factory/mill towns?
No one is saying they can't be prosperous. Just that they need solutions to be so. Before it got derailed by people insisting all of rural America is doing just fine and getting offended by any notion to the contrary, the discussion had been about things that might help these areas prosper again, such as green energy jobs that maybe could replace lost coal jobs. The internet was brought up by a poster who stated that lack of infrastructure (including high speed internet) might be a problem in attracting new industries to these areas.
Derailing the thread happened because we disagree with the how the thread is going. Most of rural America is not in distress, in poverty, jobless, drug addicted or starving. Most people in rural areas are not retired. Many small rural towns are prospering just fine.
I live in a little mill town, next to a hospital. My friends bought the old mill and repurposed it for their business. There are several other factories still in business. The little mill homes are being refreshed and are affordable for young families and retirees, and they are cuter and more practical than tiny homes. Some of our friends live in nice mobile homes on hill tops with fabulous views. It's new mixed with old, small mixed with large, lots of open space and country roads.
Most of our schools are new. We have the same jobs here as in other rural communities all over this country, teachers, doctors, store owners, police officers, mayors, attorneys, judges, fast food, factory work, retail, construction, etc. Some people may even drive 15 minutes away to work at local colleges or in a larger town. Still, that's a much shorter commute time than most in urban areas.
Some of the nicest homes are a little further out, not much business out there except for farming and schools. They drive the extra ten minutes to town to shop.
The article has misled many posters to believe that all 55-65 million people in rural America are in trouble and need solutions so they can be like urban areas. It's just not so. That's why we're all sharing about where we live in rural America.
Derailing the thread happened because we disagree with the how the thread is going. Most of rural America is not in distress, in poverty, jobless, drug addicted or starving. Most people in rural areas are not retired. Many small rural towns are prospering just fine.
I live in a little mill town, next to a hospital. My friends bought the old mill and repurposed it for their business. There are several other factories still in business. The little mill homes are being refreshed and are affordable for young families and retirees, and they are cuter and more practical than tiny homes. Some of our friends live in nice mobile homes on hill tops with fabulous views. It's new mixed with old, small mixed with large, lots of open space and country roads.
Most of our schools are new. We have the same jobs here as in other rural communities all over this country, teachers, doctors, store owners, police officers, mayors, attorneys, judges, fast food, factory work, retail, construction, etc. Some people may even drive 15 minutes away to work at local colleges or in a larger town. Still, that's a much shorter commute time than most in urban areas.
Some of the nicest homes are a little further out, not much business out there except for farming and schools. They drive the extra ten minutes to town to shop.
The article has misled many posters to believe that all 55-65 million people in rural America are in trouble and need solutions so they can be like urban areas. It's just not so. That's why we're all sharing about where we live in rural America.
Yes, I know, I have stated that multiple times. Not one post stated this applies to all or even most rural areas. Not one. The article isn't about all of rural America, it is about the economically devastated areas, obviously. The ONLY people trying to make it about all of rural America are you guys.
The article does make it seem that all of rural America is in decline. You would think using averages of such a large data would be scrutinized more than it is. I get that they want to talk about a general trend, but this is a trend that is not isolated to America.
In the cases of cities it is diversification of industries which have allowed them to thrive where others have failed.
Rural areas do not have the population (and capital) to support the benefit of diversification and so it comes down to some level of luck if the industry flourishes or dies. Thrusting industries on these locations is pretty lazy, and that is because collaborating with this declining communities is nuanced and takes more effort than the Federal Government is willing to put forward.
As someone who grew up in the city, I would not pretend to know how Rural communities best function using self sustaining activities, bartering, or typical wage jobs. It seems trying to apply larger economic goals to smaller communities is not the best fit.
Yes, I know, I have stated that multiple times. Not one post stated this applies to all or even most rural areas. Not one. The article isn't about all of rural America, it is about the economically devastated areas, obviously. The ONLY people trying to make it about all of rural America are you guys.
No, the article was:
And if today’s polarized politics are noxious, what might they look like in a country perpetually divided between diverse, prosperous liberal cities and a largely white rural America in decline? As Mr. Galston warned: “Think through the political consequences of saying to a substantial portion of Americans, which is even more substantial in political terms, ‘We think you’re toast.’ ”
The distress of 50 million Americans should concern everyone. Powerful economic forces are arrayed against rural America and, so far, efforts to turn it around have failed. Not every small town can be a tech hub, nor should it be. But that can’t be the only answer.
50 million (out of 60 million rural) Americans are not in distress. That's what we're saying.
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.
