2 ms·

> I think the key observation is this: everything you say is true, and yet many rural areas still have terrible economies. Well yes, because the actual physica

• throwaway729 10y ago
  > Well yes, because the actual physical capital (machines, skilled labor, etc) is concentrated in cities Yes -- particularly with respect to skilled labor. And that's largely a good thing for the working class. The alternative is local monopolies on the labor market. Highly skilled workers flock to areas where employers must compete with one another for a very good reason... > Increasingly so, in fact, as the economy has become dominated by monopolies and oligopolies... The urban population in the United States sky-rocketed over exactly the same period of time that Lynn and Longman romanticize. Although I agree with a lot of their concrete policy proposals, I don't think that those policies would do anything to geographically decentralize economic activity.
  • rplst8 10y ago
    Yeah, centralization of the economy is great. So we all get to sit in traffic. Or walk and live in a closet sized apartment.
  • eli_gottlieb 10y ago
    >Although I agree with a lot of their concrete policy proposals, I don't think that those policies would do anything to geographically decentralize economic activity. There's a difference between urban and megalopolis urban. Lots of jobs used to be in smaller, regional cities that had several employers available.