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.
I am guessing the article was trying to dispel the belief in their rugged independence many rural people have, by showing just how dependent they really are on government subsidies and help. The political stance that 'we don't need government' is factually completely wrong. The most rural and most conservative areas (typically the same thing) are economically subsidized by the wealthier, more liberal areas of the country, the very places they rail against. If the liberal cities did not pour money into the conservative rural areas via resdistributive taxation, they would wither and die (at least, faster and more painfully than they already are).
Country folks are indeed more independent -- but only so to say personally. Helping your neighbors, managing your woodlot, growing your own food, hunting for meat, building and repairing your homestead, sure. But that is small potatoes compared with the grants for dams, roads, public buildings, internet, etc etc that make living in the country possible without the kinds of sacrifice, isolation, and enormous labor that it would entail if the federal government did not support them.
My house was one of the first built in this area of New England -- it was at that time on the frontier. Historical records reveal the unimaginable labor necessary to create this town on the edge of the wilderness, labor that continued in similar vein for another nearly 200 years.
Status:
"Hello Darlin, Nice to see you - Conway Twitty"
(set 7 days ago)
Location: 9764 Jeopardy Lane
791 posts, read 374,289 times
Reputation: 834
Quote:
Originally Posted by sombrueil
I am guessing the article was trying to dispel the belief in their rugged independence many rural people have, by showing just how dependent they really are on government subsidies and help. The political stance that 'we don't need government' is factually completely wrong. The most rural and most conservative areas (typically the same thing) are economically subsidized by the wealthier, more liberal areas of the country, the very places they rail against. If the liberal cities did not pour money into the conservative rural areas via resdistributive taxation, they would wither and die (at least, faster and more painfully than they already are).
Country folks are indeed more independent -- but only so to say personally. Helping your neighbors, managing your woodlot, growing your own food, hunting for meat, building and repairing your homestead, sure. But that is small potatoes compared with the grants for dams, roads, public buildings, internet, etc etc that make living in the country possible without the kinds of sacrifice, isolation, and enormous labor that it would entail if the federal government did not support them.
My house was one of the first built in this area of New England -- it was at that time on the frontier. Historical records reveal the unimaginable labor necessary to create this town on the edge of the wilderness, labor that continued in similar vein for another nearly 200 years.
I read the article, and many people have independence from government because they are wealthy and choose to live rural. They are rural because they can be, do not want government telling them how to live which collides directly with the urbanite mentality with a layer cake of government and that is the reason this article was written.
It was written to demonize, neigh, to bring into false perspective those that have that freedom by comparing them to those that consume welfare around them. The wealthy rural folks are subsidized by nobody and subsidize those living around them. Plenty of gravel roads around here - did you pay for that?
I think the article is trying to dispel the idea that the people I describe actually do exist. That the wealthy rural people actually exist because of the misery of being a miscreant, urban liberal. It creates great envy in the hearts and minds of liberals reading the New Yorker that someone could exist with that level of freedom and happiness and so the intent was to skew it for the readers and turn it into a fictitious cartoon character, a feel good story for those drudging along.
As I have always said, I can visit NY, I would never live there, ever.
I read the article, and many people have independence from government because they are wealthy and choose to live rural. They are rural because they can be, do not want government telling them how to live which collides directly with the urbanite mentality with a layer cake of government and that is the reason this article was written.
Use some care when tossing the word 'wealthy' round like that.
Yes, there are some wealthy rural people.
I do not consider myself to be 'wealthy'. My pension income hovers very close to the federal poverty level, but I own our home, vehicles and land with no debts. Because I am so wealthy we also have an apartment building in a nearby city. On these interwebx forums when folks talk about wealth, I suspect they have an entirely different mental picture of what that is. I see posters who say they make $100k a year, but do not consider themselves to be wealthy. So what doe that say about a guy making $20k a year and supporting his family?
It takes a lot more money to do things in a city, that is just the plain fact.
City wealth is a completely different beast than country wealth.
You can own 1,000 acres of land, but without any cattle, you still don't have two nickels to rub together.
Also, the wealthiest rural counties tend to have a greater amount of people that are working remotely and many different sources of investment income, passive income, and trust funds. Teton County, WY has the highest median household income of any rural county along with the highest median house price at well over a million dollars. No state income tax there is a factor. You can also find significant rural wealth in the Lakes Region of New Hampshire right by the water, but that dissipates significantly once you travel away from the "big lake."
Status:
"Hello Darlin, Nice to see you - Conway Twitty"
(set 7 days ago)
Location: 9764 Jeopardy Lane
791 posts, read 374,289 times
Reputation: 834
Quote:
Originally Posted by Submariner
Use some care when tossing the word 'wealthy' round like that.
Yes, there are some wealthy rural people.
I do not consider myself to be 'wealthy'. My pension income hovers very close to the federal poverty level, but I own our home, vehicles and land with no debts. Because I am so wealthy we also have an apartment building in a nearby city. On these interwebx forums when folks talk about wealth, I suspect they have an entirely different mental picture of what that is. I see posters who say they make $100k a year, but do not consider themselves to be wealthy. So what doe that say about a guy making $20k a year and supporting his family?
It takes a lot more money to do things in a city, that is just the plain fact.
City wealth is a completely different beast than country wealth.
You can own 1,000 acres of land, but without any cattle, you still don't have two nickels to rub together.
Point taken. I am not wealthy either but wealthy compared to others in my area because I draw a white collar salary that I would make in a city. I am not the only one. Sometimes I wonder though, these blue collar guys are rolling in some money judging by their equipment, trucks, houses, etc. A guy worked on my house and sent me pictures of his cars - he has an entire outbuilding filled with restored cars on lifts that have to be near a million dollars total. There are a lot of people without as well, no doubt, but I also drive through Amish country sometime - hundreds of square miles of wealthy living if you ask me. I see people around here with 75K vehicles, they didn't get that by being broke, but I also see cars with broken windshields running on the emergency spare.
I took a pay cut to be remote and I have neighbors that tend to be older, on pensions, etc. so time will tell what happens when age runs its course but my guess is there is someone else in line ready to live in these places. When I had some trees cut down the price I was quoted I was like, man, that is half what it would have cost where I came from. He tried to not grind the stumps and gave me back $1500 as a holder for when came back because his machine was out. I told him I do not trust he will finish the job and he said for $1500 he would chew the stumps out with his teeth and I believed him.
A strange phenomenon I have noticed which is different than how I was brought up, people here tend to work to live vs. live to work for real. Meaning they could be rich but do just enough to maintain lifestyle. In the city it always about making more but not here, they work to live and do not work extra to get wealthy, just to live the way they want to live and that frequently is much less than a 40hr work week.
Status:
"Hello Darlin, Nice to see you - Conway Twitty"
(set 7 days ago)
Location: 9764 Jeopardy Lane
791 posts, read 374,289 times
Reputation: 834
Quote:
Originally Posted by GraniteStater
Also, the wealthiest rural counties tend to have a greater amount of people that are working remotely and many different sources of investment income, passive income, and trust funds. Teton County, WY has the highest median household income of any rural county along with the highest median house price at well over a million dollars. No state income tax there is a factor. You can also find significant rural wealth in the Lakes Region of New Hampshire right by the water, but that dissipates significantly once you travel away from the "big lake."
I don't have any of those incomes which is concerning to me. I am prepared for that though, will do other things and any things to make money should the need arise. Did you see the recent South Park? *Spoiler Alert* - the white collar people are trying to get blue collar people to fix things because they are unable to do so and offering free HR services, consulting, etc. LOL, and the blue collar people are walking around in fur coats and limousines.
It gets you thinking, who cares that I have an CS degree, I will be a plumber or electrician or worse comes to worse, live off my own land which is the end result of proper planning and sacrifice. I want to start doing wood working and making stained glass and see if I can make money that way. Anyway I live rural because try eating your drywall in your city apartment or farming your 20 square foot yard when SHTF.
Sorry, I digress, I mentioned the Amish earlier, 100% money and they have towns nearby to sell their wares. I am not Amish but they know what they are doing. They can keep bad business away and make furniture that is sought after. Some of the most idyllic scenery in the world, sun coming up, rooster crowing, etc.
[quote=LeisureSLarry;66107982]I read the article, and many people have independence from government because they are wealthy and choose to live rural. They are rural because they can be, do not want government telling them how to live which collides directly with the urbanite mentality with a layer cake of government and that is the reason this article was written.
It was written to demonize, neigh, to bring into false perspective those that have that freedom by comparing them to those that consume welfare around them. The wealthy rural folks are subsidized by nobody and subsidize those living around them. Plenty of gravel roads around here - did you pay for that?
I think the article is trying to dispel the idea that the people I describe actually do exist. That the wealthy rural people actually exist because of the misery of being a miscreant, urban liberal. It creates great envy in the hearts and minds of liberals reading the New Yorker that someone could exist with that level of freedom and happiness and so the intent was to skew it for the readers and turn it into a fictitious cartoon character, a feel good story for those drudging along.
As I have always said, I can visit NY, I would never live there, ever.
I feel confident in saying that I have no idea what you're talking about.
The piece had some interesting art history, but at the conclusion it resorts to stereotypes and fear mongering. Over the past ten years I’ve traveled through a lot of reservations and rural small towns in the southwest. Today in America there are areas of desperate poverty and decay, places where less than $100K of government spending for cleanup or infrastructure could make a huge difference to the lives of the locals. But that money always seems to end up elsewhere and my guess is it’s allocated to urban projects deemed more worthy. The coastal elites long ago declared war on small towns with the likes of Agenda 21 and other urbanization initiatives. This might explain some of the rural resentment that Mr. Conn finds curious.
TimAZ and others might be shocked to know just how little "coastal elites" (which are virtually all middle and working class, not rich) even think about them. They did not 'declare war'. They are not writhing with anger. That is what is called "projection" -- those are YOUR emotions, not theirs. They spend zero time plotting against you, zero time filled with jealousy at your 'freedom'. They do not think of you at all. What you imagine they are deliberately doing to you is purely collateral damage, unintended consequences, and global capitalist resource extraction.
It may be painful to understand that you are nothing more than a vague, romanticized nostalgia story to them, when they think of you at all. But it's the truth.
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.
