|
zoux posted:Hmmm looks like Hoekstra's PR agency is working in Colorado. So, who do we figure is giving "Friends of Safe Energy" money? CEI? AFP? Generation Opportunity? American Future Fund?
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2014 23:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 11:44 |
|
|
So all we need to do to turn the rurals into leftists is convince them that their whole way of life is stupid and wrong and especially (ugh) boring compared to the exciting city? And farms just need to buy more machinery until they can run themselves and we don't need any more farmers? If it's that easy why haven't we done it before!
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2014 23:25
|
|
|
Joementum posted:So, who do we figure is giving "Friends of Safe Energy" money? CEI? AFP? Generation Opportunity? American Future Fund? I know who's not donating: terrorists. Becausing fracking is the true enemy of terrorism.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2014 23:31
|
|
|
Luigi Thirty posted:So all we need to do to turn the rurals into leftists is convince them that their whole way of life is stupid and wrong and especially (ugh) boring compared to the exciting city? And farms just need to buy more machinery until they can run themselves and we don't need any more farmers? If it's that easy why haven't we done it before! We have.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2014 23:32
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:Blarg The elusive self-hating hillbilly.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2014 23:32
|
|
|
Luigi Thirty posted:So all we need to do to turn the rurals into leftists is convince them that their whole way of life is stupid and wrong and especially (ugh) boring compared to the exciting city? Practically speaking all we'd need to do to turn rurals into leftists is abandon most of the social platform. Rurals won't ever join the party of the blacks and the gays and immigration and so on. Like I said, leftists could totally look at how Reagan did it: go campaign on some sites where famous lynching incidents took place, talk about "states rights" and so on, they'll hear the dogwhistle. Basically do another Dixiecrats style flipflop of the parties. That's something I'm against, but I don't see any other way to get the Real America pickup-driving types into the party. quote:And farms just need to buy more machinery until they can run themselves and we don't need any more farmers? If it's that easy why haven't we done it before! Well actually we already have. That's my point.  Wishing for the good ol' days when the kids stayed home and helped pa run the farm isn't going to bring them back. We live in the 21st century where production of everything is mechanized and generational artisan production is a niche mode at best. Unlike most artisans, farmers are politically overrepresented so they've been given enough welfare goodies to cushion the shock. But it's never going back to the Way It Was, and it's not the fault of those darned kids who demonized farmers until nobody wanted to live in rural Iowa. Blaming urbanites for the decline in the agricultural workforce is just more reactionary opposition to another social change our society is undergoing. They'd stay down on the farm if it weren't for that damned rock and roll music! 
Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 00:50 on Aug 22, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2014 23:34
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:We don't need gangs of slaves or menial laborers tilling the earth in 2014, buy yourself a tractor. Nah we still have those, usually they're called prisoners or Mexicans these days.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2014 23:45
|
|
|
Omelette du Fromage posted:Is Paul MaudDib a known troll or just a smugposting moron? Possibly. Paul MaudDib posted:We shouldn't look at historical trends that are clearly over, like rural support for unionism. Conversely the ones that are clearly still in force - like how rurals tend to flip a reactionary shitfit over every social issue - still need to be taken into account when performing political triangulation. You do realize that the biggest reactionaries are not in fact the rural poor in flyover country but are actually the people who identify with the Tea Party aka white middle-upper middle income suburbanites, right? If you really think much of the rural poor are voting for conservatives because they hate gays and minorities, you don't know too many of those people. The rural people vote that way because they think Democrats (and the left) disdain them and their culture. Much of the racism that goes on is out of ignorance - as I've been saying throughout this conversation. The ones that escape their rural towns and interact with other cultures tend to be less prejudiced because it isn't derived from malice. quote:Well, "rural people need to be more cosmopolitan" was sort of exactly my thesis, yeah. That's the exact opposite of "leftists can win the day by engaging culturally with rurals", which was the claim under discussion. People don't just become more cosmopolitan. They either need to be introduced to these concepts or actually experience other cultures' struggles firsthand. I didn't break out of my young conservatism until I met people of different backgrounds and had a chance to befriend and listen to them. You don't outreach to a community by beating them over the head with how backwards and hick-tastic you think they are. quote:Do you really think this is any different for big corporations? Do you really think that any person in the world wakes up, twirls their moustache, and decides that today they will kill 27 miners in a cave-in or poison an entire state's drinking water to save $10k on the maintenance budget? The difference here is that these serious accidents happen so infrequently and are so isolated that it is hard to make your average family farmer think it's something that is worth possibly jeopardizing their ability to make a living on their farm. To them it is natural to have your kids work with you, they've been doing it for generations and anything which threatens that threatens their livelihood and family tradition. Contrast this to corporations literally crashing the economy for more profits and then getting mad at the government for being tough on them. The two are hardly comparable. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/29/us/on-us-farms-deaths-in-silos-persist.html?pagewanted=all quote:So no, you're absolutely wrong, farmers do believe it is their right to endanger their workers, to pay them less than the prevailing wage, to employ child labor - on and on. Every single goddamn labor law has to have a carveout for these hicks because otherwise they pitch a fit. How does what you quoted suggest that they think its their right to employ child labor or pay less than minimum wage? I'm having a hard time taking you seriously when you seem more motivated by hatred of rural people than any sort of logic. Aves Maria! fucked around with this message at 23:50 on Aug 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2014 23:47
|
|
|
What about rural Hispanics? Are they bad too? I just want to be sure I'm looking down my nose at the right group of people.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2014 23:49
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:Practically speaking all we'd need to do to turn rurals into leftists is abandon most of the social platform. Rurals won't ever join the party of the blacks and the gays and immigration and so on. Like I said - leftists could totally look at how Reagan did it: go campaign on some sites where famous lynching incidents took place, talk about "states rights" and so on, they'll hear the dogwhistle. Reminder that there are very real benefits to urbanization; namely that per capita consumption of energy and water is markedly reduced as well as increased efficiencies of scale regarding infrastructure demand and maintenance. I sometimes wonder how soon before the next energy crisis will people commonly demonize living in the sticks as horribly wasteful instead of just quaintly backwards.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2014 23:56
|
|
|
420DD Butts posted:You do realize that the biggest reactionaries are not in fact the rural poor in flyover country but are actually the people who identify with the Tea Party aka white middle-upper middle income suburbanites, right? If you really think much of the rural poor are voting for conservatives because they hate gays and minorities, you don't know too many of those people. The rural people vote that way because they think Democrats (and the left) disdain them and their culture. Much of the racism that goes on is out of ignorance - as I've been saying throughout this conversation. The ones that escape their rural towns and interact with other cultures tend to be less prejudiced because it isn't derived from malice Indeed, and people try to do that! I posted the HRC thing as an example. It doesn't seem to really have a whole lot of impact on a large-scale long-term basis, though. Outreach has been going on for a long-rear end time, it hasn't seemed to change the fact that rural areas are filled with reactionaries who hate any social change. I think at the end of the day "becoming cosmopolitan" is a change you have to make yourself - no amount of outreach really helps until you've realized that you're kinda bigoted and decide to hear what others have to say, and it's fairly difficult for that threshold to be crossed in really isolated and homogenous areas. quote:The difference here is that these serious accidents happen so infrequently and are so isolated that it is hard to make your average family farmer think it's something that is worth possibly jeopardizing their ability to make a living on their farm. I think your explanation is probably correct, but that's not a good reason to give in and let them do whatever they want. Accidents are relatively infrequent because we have rules that keep people safe. If you ignore the rules, accidents happen. That's why we have rules in the first place. Even so people still do die rather often, and they used to die a lot more before we had those rules. Moreover I'd throw in that family farmers are indeed getting crowded out and one of their reactions to this is to try and cut corners. "Spending all that money when I'm barely hanging on and have always been fine without" is probably a thought process too. quote:To them it is natural to have your kids work with you, they've been doing it for generations and anything that threatens that threatens their livelihood and family tradition. Believe it or not most corporations didn't willingly crash the economy. They did stupid, short-sighted things that had tragic consequences, they didn't willingly set out to cause the financial sector to explode in a gigantic crisis that would bring themselves down with everyone else. It's just as natural for Bank of America to rip someone off with some junk mortgages as it is for a farmer to send a dumb kid into a corn silo with no harness. "It's against the rules but I've done it a billion times before and it didn't crash the economy or kill anyone, I'm sure it'll be fine this time too" is the obvious thought process which you literally just described above. And maybe this time it won't. But that's not a good reason to let them ignore labor laws. "Never" is an awfully long time, and so is "dead forever". And the agricultural sector generates a lot of deaths.  quote:How does what you quoted suggest that they think its their right to employ child labor or pay less than minimum wage? I'm having a hard time taking you seriously when you seem more motivated by hatred of rural people than any sort of logic. "It's natural to have my kids work with me, I've been doing it for generations, how dare the government tell me what to do" is literally the thought process you just described. How is that possibly anything other than family farmers feeling that they're entitled to ignore labor laws? e: sorry, too snarky Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 01:17 on Aug 22, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2014 23:58
|
|
|
H.P. Hovercraft posted:Reminder that there are very real benefits to urbanization; namely that per capita consumption of energy and water is markedly reduced as well as increased efficiencies of scale regarding infrastructure demand and maintenance. Literally never because the majority of people who live in a rural areas do important things like farm or drill for oil or staff prisons or whatever else. Also not a whole lot of people live out in rural areas and less will whenever the next energy crisis happens that people will be mad at people who drive big cars than people who live far away. You can automate farming a hell of a lot and require less people to live in rural areas but there will always be people who need to be out there to do stuff not to mention people who would rather live out there.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2014 00:04
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:All throughout little egypt, mainly Williamson County and in Herrin. Take a look at the context surrounding the Battle of Mulkeytown--Jewish bootleggers running guns from StL to communists in Southern Illinois. You don't find this talked about in polite society, and most of the folks who lived through it are dead. I had kin from Kinmundy who done worked for the IC down round that time who'd be a hoot'n anda hollar'n 'bout them Chicago bosses and theys coals issues. Wow, I've lived in Little Egypt for years hadn't really heard a lot about this. I've heard bits and pieces of that history (stuff like the unionization fights and events like the Herrin massacre) but didn't realize stuff like that was part of an attempted Communist revolution. Neat, I'll have to look into this a bit more. Do you know any books I could check out regarding this?
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2014 00:05
|
|
|
420DD Butts posted:The issue is that the vast majority of "frothing Limbaugh listeners" are middle-upper middle class suburbanites, not people living in rural towns in flyover country. Citation needed because I'm not certain this is true. Not saying you're wrong, I'd just like to know because the only thing I can provide on an anecdotal level is that no matter where I go, and especially in wastelands like Nebraska and Bumfuck, Iowa, I can always find the Rush Limbaugh show playing somewhere on the dial.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2014 00:13
|
|
|
Why would they care about courting donations from poor farmers in flyover states instead of upper middle class suburbanites who think they're rurals because they own a F-150 extended cab?
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2014 00:15
|
|
|
Venusian Weasel posted:Wow, I've lived in Little Egypt for years hadn't really heard a lot about this. I've heard bits and pieces of that history (stuff like the unionization fights and events like the Herrin massacre) but didn't realize stuff like that was part of an attempted Communist revolution. Neat, I'll have to look into this a bit more. Do you know any books I could check out regarding this? Guy I know wrote Bloody Williamson: A Chapter in American Lawlessness, its a well-sourced read. I wouldn't characterize it as an outright attempted revolution designed to overthrow the Federal government, more like the communist party down in Little Egypt wanting to overthrow a few county power structures. The way I heard it was that some abandoned and less used mines were used for illicit booze and other production, and some too-honest sherrifs were loving with the game. So some party agitators arranged some trades, with crates going to StL in exchange for the department's WW1-surplus weapons. The real game was in UTU and BLME/BLEM distriburing UMWA's products to Chicago, and when some podunk county prosletyzing folk wanted to gently caress that up, well, there's a reason why communities with high collective efficacy aligned politically with avowed athiests.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2014 00:16
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:Citation needed because I'm not certain this is true. Not saying you're wrong, I'd just like to know because the only thing I can provide on an anecdotal level is that no matter where I go, and especially in wastelands like Nebraska and Bumfuck, Iowa, I can always find the Rush Limbaugh show playing somewhere on the dial. https://www.quantcast.com/rushlimbaugh.com?country=US I was going off this, but this also suggests that his audience contains more college grads than the national average for all news media and they're disproportionately old. Paul MaudDib posted:There's a word for people who grow personally by interacting with individuals of different experiences, backgrounds, and cultures. It's called "cosmopolitan". If you can't even read what I'm saying and feel like doing smug poo poo like this, I'm not going to bother engaging with you.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2014 00:23
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:Citation needed because I'm not certain this is true. Not saying you're wrong, I'd just like to know because the only thing I can provide on an anecdotal level is that no matter where I go, and especially in wastelands like Nebraska and Bumfuck, Iowa, I can always find the Rush Limbaugh show playing somewhere on the dial. 15% of the country is rural and supposedly about half of the country are "frothy Limbaugh listeners".
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2014 00:31
|
|
|
What about towns like my home town? Not many people live there but they do dig up useful things like silver, zinc, lead, and copper.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2014 00:54
|
|
|
A good strategy for getting people in rural areas to be more liberal is to have a bunch of hippies set up communes there in the 70s. Anyway, in Poplar Bluffs, Missouri it's a different story. Councilman Peter Tinsley is very sorry for posting some racist images on Facebook, but he has an excuse: he was a Republican. quote:The photos depict Obama in a way some consider to be racist and offensive. It was the classic Witch Doctor Obama image, in case you're wondering.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2014 01:13
|
|
|
CongoJack posted:Literally never because the majority of people who live in a rural areas do important things like farm or drill for oil or staff prisons or whatever else. Also not a whole lot of people live out in rural areas and less will whenever the next energy crisis happens that people will be mad at people who drive big cars than people who live far away. That isn't really true, what used to be rural is now suburbs. So now we have a bunch of people living far away from where they work, we have all of the negative side effects, and none of them are producing a drat thing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2014 01:18
|
|
|
Pohl posted:That isn't really true, what used to be rural is now suburbs. So now we have a bunch of people living far away from where they work, we have all of the negative side effects, and none of them are producing a drat thing. Thus, by a continuous shifting of rhetorical focus, the enemies are at the same time rural and suburban.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2014 01:21
|
|
|
Pohl posted:That isn't really true, what used to be rural is now suburbs. So now we have a bunch of people living far away from where they work, we have all of the negative side effects, and none of them are producing a drat thing. I can assure you that rural communities still exist. Just spent some time in one in Northern Michigan in fact.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2014 01:28
|
|
|
New Division posted:I can assure you that rural communities still exist. Just spent some time in one in Northern Michigan in fact. I know they exist, I just wasn't really clear with what I was trying to say. I've seen a ton of farmland where I live sold off and turned into subdivisions. They are an hour out of town, but they are cheap, so people buy them up like crazy. This has been happening for decades now, and the developers keep buying more land and the suburbs keep getting farther and farther from town. Are those suburbs rural or urban? That is what I meant to say, I realize I made a crappy comment that didn't really reflect the intention of what I had in mind. At least rural and urban communities both serve a purpose, suburbs are just a god awful desecration of the earth.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2014 01:47
|
|
|
It's been a slow shift here. A lot of the smaller towns have been slowly drying up as their residents grow older and their children move away. The only towns that have actively been growing are ones close to a larger town or small city, and they've been changing from a small community where everyone lives and works to small communities where people sleep at night. The geography here isn't well-suited to farm consolidation. Most of the farms around here are small family plots, broken up by steep hills. Instead of aquiring mostly connected tracts of land like industrial farmers up on the plains, it's lots of small, fragmented farmlands that take a lot of effort to use effectively. The trend that I've seen here is that if a farm stops being profitable to farm, the family that owns it just stops and it slowly gets reclaimed by the forest, rather than getting bought up by a larger farm. Overall the net effect is that residents are slowly transitioning from production to services. My Imaginary GF posted:Guy I know wrote Bloody Williamson: A Chapter in American Lawlessness, its a well-sourced read. I wouldn't characterize it as an outright attempted revolution designed to overthrow the Federal government, more like the communist party down in Little Egypt wanting to overthrow a few county power structures. Thanks, I'll check this out.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2014 01:51
|
|
|
Pohl posted:I know they exist, I just wasn't really clear with what I was trying to say. Suburbs are tricky, but generally you would say they're the ring that surrounds urban areas. Then you have the exurbs, which are even further out (think folks who commute one and half hours just to get to work in the urban core. I'm sure there are some geographers and statistics geeks in the maps thread who would enjoy talking about this.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2014 01:52
|
|
|
So, for anyone who isn't following Vox, you may not be aware that White-on-white murder in America is out of control. Best quote of a great article quote:The real tragedy is that none of Obama's 43 white predecessors have addressed it either. Indeed, looking back on America's political iconography, there are disturbing trends toward the glorification of white violence. Peer inside the US Capitol building, and you'll find a monument to Confederate President Jefferson Davis — the leader of an insurgency that caused an unprecedented quantity of violent white deaths. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2014 02:20
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:All throughout little egypt, mainly Williamson County and in Herrin. Take a look at the context surrounding the Battle of Mulkeytown--Jewish bootleggers running guns from StL to communists in Southern Illinois. You don't find this talked about in polite society, and most of the folks who lived through it are dead. I had kin from Kinmundy who done worked for the IC down round that time who'd be a hoot'n anda hollar'n 'bout them Chicago bosses and theys coals issues. Could you give a more complete answer or some links? All that does is obliquely reference things I either know very little about or absolutely nothing about. If you know something, educate!
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2014 02:52
|
|
|
So for people talking about the difficulty of organizing rural farmers, it's actually been achieved in the past in Alabama. During the Great Depression and the years leading up to it, communists made huge inroads with southern rural farmers and sharecroppers. They managed to unite people across racial boundaries and helped organize some pretty big workers movements, in particular the Sharecropper's Strike of 1939. Of course most of the communists' Alabama leadership was murdered (often by the cops) so the movement eventually fell apart. I can't find a good internet source on all this, but if you are interested in reading more I would recommend Hammer and Hoe by Robin D. G. Kelley. I used it for a paper I wrote in college and it was invaluable. Pretty much any book on African American Marxism should mention it, too.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2014 03:11
|
|
|
effectual posted:Except the Oglala aquifer is being depleted, along with the fossil-based fertilizer, limiting how long factory farms will work. Fossil based fertilizer isn't really that big of an issue. Alternatives exist, they're just not economical.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2014 03:29
|
|
|
Pohl posted:I've seen a ton of farmland where I live sold off and turned into subdivisions. They are an hour out of town, but they are cheap, so people buy them up like crazy. This has been happening for decades now, and the developers keep buying more land and the suburbs keep getting farther and farther from town. They're called exurbs. All the lovely parts of suburbs plus the worst elements of rural life without the benefits of either. Basically it's where older white people are concentrating as minorities fill up older suburbs when they're pushed out by gentrification. There was a pretty good book about exurban growth a few years back called Searching for Whitopia.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2014 03:32
|
|
|
effectual posted:Except the Oglala aquifer is being depleted, along with the fossil-based fertilizer, limiting how long factory farms will work. I fully expect industrial desalinization facilities sending water to the interior with water pipelines within our lifetime. They do it for oil, why not for water as well?
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2014 03:34
|
|
|
Capfalcon posted:So, for anyone who isn't following Vox, you may not be aware that White-on-white murder in America is out of control. Of course, there is always a remedy for this epidemic.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2014 03:46
|
|
|
Since Ferguson thread seems to be busy arguing about the merits of communism, these are going here. They're very very good and worth hearing if you don't normally catch Ashbrook. Two episodes of On Point from this week. First, on race and Ferguson: http://onpoint.wbur.org/2014/08/20/ferguson-michael-brown-update-race-class And second, on police militarization. http://onpoint.wbur.org/2014/08/19/police-force-military-ferguson-shooting-michael-brown I don't know how many of y'all have been listening to NPR's shows with callers lately, but I swear that every single time they discuss the police in any way other than worshiping them, a cop will inevitable call in and get all  about how every citizen is a potential arms dealer and that we should be glad they haven't just killed us all. Happens again on that second one, although Ashbrook handles it quite well. Dude is very disarming, like Diane Rehm.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2014 03:46
|
|
|
Blindeye posted:I fully expect industrial desalinization facilities sending water to the interior with water pipelines within our lifetime. They do it for oil, why not for water as well? Desalinization would rock if we had some sort of non-carbon energy source...
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2014 03:52
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Fossil based fertilizer isn't really that big of an issue. Alternatives exist, they're just not economical. KPN The Haeber process has had the N covered for a while now. Collecting bones and the like could theoretically take care of the P pretty effectively. I'm not holding my breath on that one, but I'll just give it to you for shits and giggles. What about the K? Industrial sources of P are dwindling at a much faster rate and will realistically be the huge clusterfuck that causes a paradigm shift. But what solutions exist for K? I know it can be a byproduct of nuclear fission but I'm not sure we want to be using radioactive fertilizer. Shbobdb fucked around with this message at 03:56 on Aug 22, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2014 03:53
|
|
|
Shbobdb posted:I know it can be a byproduct of nuclear fission but I'm not sure we want to be using radioactive fertilizer. But how else are we to grow delicious tomacco?
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2014 03:54
|
|
|
zoux posted:I know who's not donating: terrorists. Becausing fracking is the true enemy of terrorism. The bright side is if pro-fracking groups keep running poo poo like this it will ensure that fracking never catches on in the Front Range.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2014 04:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 11:44 |
|
|
Elephant Ambush posted:I don't know what the going average percentage of LGBT people is, but even 10% of that is 4.5 million people. That's a fuckload of people who are directly affected by rural bigotry every day. They're either bullied or forced to stay closeted due to fear. Gay marriage doesn't fix bigotry, dude. Brannock posted:You're falling victim to corporate propaganda. The measures they use to determine which type of farms are more productive are overwhelmingly focused on monoculture farms. No poo poo a megafarm that raises only corn on their land is going to be more productive than twenty smaller farms raising exclusively corn. Economics of scale will do that! And what's the problem with that? Monocultures are the correct way to farm since it's not 1865 and there's a market that allows farmers to switch over the entire farm when it's time for rotation instead of the inconvenience of splitting up their property for zoned rotation. It's not corporate propaganda, it's simply science. Organic is a pseudoscientific money faucet for agricorps to fleece people who think they care about "good" farming. Brannock posted:I just realized that "organic" farming isn't really what I'm talking about. Buy local, buy from small farmers. Small farmers aren't necessarily organic farmers. The "organic" movement is largely crap designed to appeal to people who are trying to be conscientious but not really informed enough to make good decisions about their purchasing habits. There's also a ton of regulation and label trickery and shenanigans. Just buy local, buy local, buy local. Buying local and buying from small farmers are often worse for the environment and even for the local economy. Do not blindly buy local, only buy local when it actually makes sense. "Buy local always" like you're saying is another money-sucking marketing tool. Just as one example: if your area is great for growing wheat but terrible for growing rice, don't buy locally grown rice because it's clearly requiring extra resource input to sustain production. You always need to do your research for each and every "local" farm to ensure it's actually benefiting the world for you to choose them. BiggerBoat posted:Citation needed because I'm not certain this is true. Not saying you're wrong, I'd just like to know because the only thing I can provide on an anecdotal level is that no matter where I go, and especially in wastelands like Nebraska and Bumfuck, Iowa, I can always find the Rush Limbaugh show playing somewhere on the dial. Dude, you really have to remember that land does not equal population. You can hear Rush Limbaugh across the radio stations all over Wyoming or something, but that only reaches 500,000 at most if everyone in the state listens. Meanwhile a single radio station in a major metro can also reach 500,000 people if they only hit 5% of their listening area. Pohl posted:That isn't really true, what used to be rural is now suburbs. Not really true. Suburban land area is only about 3-5% of the country depending on how you measure things (with cities being 1%-2.5%). And it was no more than about 1% to 2% in the 50s, so rural area's only shrunken by 4% at most over that time. People VASTLY overestimate how far suburbs actually extend out. Pohl posted:Are those suburbs rural or urban? They're urban if they are part of a continuous chain of areas (although intervening large bodies of water or developed areas like industrial parks etc can be considered part of cotiguousness) of at least 500 people per square mile connected to urban centers of at least 2500 people with at least 1000 people per square mile in the core. So this includes pretty much all actual suburbs, and "suburb" areas compose roughly 40%-60% of America's urban population depnding on how you try to pin down what's "really" urban and what's "really" suburban. All census urban land fits in between 4-6% of the country's land mass, which represents a truly massive concentration of the nation's population compared to even 40 years ago. Pohl posted:At least rural and urban communities both serve a purpose, suburbs are just a god awful desecration of the earth. Look at this middle school level understanding of population. Jesus christ, we get it, you think all suburbs are exactly the same as whatever hellhole you crawled out of. But that's not how most suburbs work. effectual posted:Except the Oglala aquifer is being depleted, along with the fossil-based fertilizer, limiting how long factory farms will work. Good thing it's unneccesary to farm in areas that rely on that aquifer to feed the country. comes along bort posted:They're called exurbs. All the lovely parts of suburbs plus the worst elements of rural life without the benefits of either. Basically it's where older white people are concentrating as minorities fill up older suburbs when they're pushed out by gentrification. Notably, exurbs are almost always outside the boundaries of urban area definitions, being solidly rural. And they don't have amny people compared to normal suburbs.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2014 04:07
|
|