Gerrymandering Democrats Tighten Grasp On Conservative, Rural Oregon
A gerrymandered district means a Democrat will represent rural, conservative central Oregon in Congress for the first time in decades.A gerrymandered district means a Democrat will represent rural, conservative central Oregon in Congress for the first time in decades.Maybe Sometimes, Do Pick Up The Hitchhiker
Community is important, but it takes effort. Sometimes your neighbor needs a favor.Chicago-dwelling college teacher says people should not live in rural areas: 'The solution is to give them generous grants to relocate among other humans'
Chicago-dweller Adam Kotsko, a faculty member at the Shimer Great Books School of North Central College, has publicly opined that individuals should not reside in rural settings.
"In discussions of reducing car dependency, one often hears, 'What about people in remote rural areas?' And my gut instinct is -- people shouldn't be living there in the first place. The solution is to give them generous grants to relocate among other humans," tweeted Kotsko, who is also the author of multiple books.
"'But what if they like living in remote rural areas?' Sorry, you can't always get what you want. A lot of people would like to live in dense, transit-rich settings but can't -- either because they can't afford it or it simply doesn't exist where they are," he tweeted. "And if this sounds harsh -- don't worry, it will never happen, because our governmental institutions are INSANELY biased in favor of rural areas. They'll be fine. I'm just a guy over here having an opinion," he added. He also wrote, "'Isn't it mean to imply that rural people's lifestyle is bad and wrong?' As someone who lives in Chicago, all I can say to that is: cry me a river."
\u201c"But what if they like living in remote rural areas?" Sorry, you can't always get what you want. A lot of people would like to live in dense, transit-rich settings but can't -- either because they can't afford it or it simply doesn't exist where they are.\u201d— Adam Kotsko (@Adam Kotsko) 1661094042
Kotsko said that in his understanding, individuals living in sparsely populated areas are poverty stricken and "essentially trapped."
"My understanding is also that a lot of people in remote rural areas are desperately poor and essentially trapped there," Kotsko tweeted.
Kotsko also issued a series of tweets discussing ideas about such an urban-centric society.
"My ideal land use distribution (based heavily on KSR): all agricultural land is collectively owned and scientifically managed to balance quantity, quality, and variety of food against sustainability and ethical practices. No single-family or corporate for-profit farms," he declared. "Young adults have to do a period of public service, and one option would be a 'tour of duty' as a farm worker for a few years. Everyone would at least know someone who knows firsthand what goes into food production," Kotsko continued.
"The overwhelming majority of people live in a handful of ultradense urban cores, connected by high-speed rail. No car-based suburban communities exist. A handful of people stay in rural areas full-time to manage the work brigades or run wilderness retreats or whatever," he added. "The human footprint would be vastly less in this system -- all land not used for agriculture would be left wild. Another public service option would be dismantling the suburbs -- stripping copper wire and other useable resources, removing toxins, then leaving them to rot."
\u201cThe human footprint would be vastly less in this system -- all land not used for agriculture would be left wild. Another public service option would be dismantling the suburbs -- stripping copper wire and other useable resources, removing toxins, then leaving them to rot.\u201d— Adam Kotsko (@Adam Kotsko) 1661174131
Rural populations decline in America for the first time in recorded history
For the first time in history, America’s rural population has declined.
A recently concluded study from the University of New Hampshire’s Carsey School of Public Policy found that the population of rural America dropped by nearly 300,000 between 2010 and 2020. This marks a 0.06% population decline and the first decline in America’s rural population in recorded history.
The study’s head researcher and author, Kenneth Johnson, told The Hill that “actual size of the loss isn’t particularly a big deal” but “the fact that it actually happened, that rural America, as a whole lost population, reflects a significant change.”
Johnson emphasized that it is important to try to analyze what this decrease means when assessing long-term demographic change.
Johnson asked, “Is it just a short-term thing, or is it a longer-term thing?”
Researchers are alarmed by this decrease, in part, because it indicates a reversal of immense growth in rural communities in recent decades.
From 2000 to 2010 there was a 1.5 million-person increase in rural population, and from 1990 to 2000 there was a 3.4 million increase.
The study posits that population increase is a consequence of the “balance” between births and deaths as well as migration patterns to and from rural areas.
Johnson’s study notes that the Great Recession of 2008 economically “froze” many American in place. Unemployment, housing debt, and a generally weak economy discouraged Americans from moving to rural parts of the country from urban areas.
It also found that rural populations, typically having older populations, experienced more deaths than births as fertility rates plummeted throughout the country.
Johnson wrote, “Natural increase [in population] declined because there were fewer births and more deaths. In 2020, fertility rates hit records lows and there were the fewest births since 1979. At the same time, deaths were at record highs because of population aging and growing deaths of despair (including from drug overdoses and suicide).”
In recent years, fentanyl overdoses have drastically increased as the synthetic opioid poured across America’s southern border. Fentanyl overdose has, in fact, become the leading cause of death among Americans ages 18-45.
Johnson suggests that rural population loss is likely to continue. He said, “If rural outmigration is ongoing, and deaths continue to exceed births in many rural areas due to low fertility and higher mortality among the aging rural population, then population losses are likely to continue in much of rural America.”
The study concludes by stating that “the demographic changes that are reshaping nonmetropolitan areas are important to contemporary policy making intended to increase the viability of rural communities and enhance their contribution to the nation’s material, environmental, and social well-being.”
Today's top stories
www.theblaze.com
www.theblaze.com
freebeacon.com