5 ms·

I don't live there, but I do live in a remote part of California, near the Mendocino/Humboldt county line. It's 20 minutes to the post office and about an hour

I don't live there, but I do live in a remote part of California, near the Mendocino/Humboldt county line. It's 20 minutes to the post office and about an hour to the nearest "real" town. In some ways it's more isolated than the area described in the article, because of how steep and dense the terrain is (read up on the Lost Coast if you're interested). The only available Internet is satellite (which sucks, it's like a phone plan with a certain amount of data and after that you're severely throttled). I moved up here recently after working as a developer in SF for a few years, so my situation and my reasons are a bit different than most of the local population. I did it because it is a beautiful place, I essentially live in a forest with no real neighbors. I have space to grow food and build things and just feel relaxed and free (I love the energy of the city but the lack of space gives me anxiety). Everyone I meet up here seems happy, friendly, and helpful. I feel more connected to the local community because it's not a writhing mass of millions of people. If you ever go camping for a few days and feel kind of rejuvenated by nature, it's like that, except permanent. As for the economy, that is definitely an interesting question. This area was previously sustained by massive logging operations, and when that was curtailed things started going into decline (lot of abandoned/decrepit buildings around). Now there's a very strange shadow economy based on marijuana farming, that is starting to transition into a lawful enterprise. My own economic interests are around lodging/hospitality/resort type offerings. I would say most people that live in the area like it and don't have any interest in moving to a city or something like that. I don't like calling it a "slower pace of life" but of course it is in some ways. We're not running around innovating and pushing the boundaries of technology and whatnot, but a lot of the people I know who are doing that don't seem very happy either.

EliRivers 9y ago
My own economic interests are around lodging/hospitality/resort type offerings. I do see that; areas whose economy is primarily based on people from cities/towns coming to spend their money in that area. I'm sure economists have a term for that; it's not producing "value" (for want of a better term) in the same way that those cities/towns do. It's where some of the "value" produced in those other areas gets spent. I do need a better term than "value" here. That's not quite the term I mean. Maybe economists have a suitable term for it.
- resu_nimda 9y ago
  Economically, if people are choosing to spend their money somewhere, they believe that place is generating an equal amount of value for them. Psychologically, value is totally subjective. You are making a distinction between, I guess, "rural tourism" value and, generally, "things a city does" value, but can you make an objective argument for one over the other? Is there a difference in value-add between a hotel in the city and a bed-and-breakfast in the country? If the rural business makes furniture that people take back to the city, which way is the value going?
  - EliRivers 9y ago
    When I spend money, it's not to get equal value. I spend money because what I get for it is worth more to me than the money. Maybe everyone else is swapping money for something of equal value, but I doubt it. People spend money because they value the thing they buy more than the money in their hand.

EliRivers 9y ago

My own economic interests are around lodging/hospitality/resort type offerings. I do see that; areas whose economy is primarily based on people from cities/towns coming to spend their money in that area. I'm sure economists have a term for that; it's not producing "value" (for want of a better term) in the same way that those cities/towns do. It's where some of the "value" produced in those other areas gets spent. I do need a better term than "value" here. That's not quite the term I mean. Maybe economists have a suitable term for it.

resu_nimda 9y ago
Economically, if people are choosing to spend their money somewhere, they believe that place is generating an equal amount of value for them. Psychologically, value is totally subjective. You are making a distinction between, I guess, "rural tourism" value and, generally, "things a city does" value, but can you make an objective argument for one over the other? Is there a difference in value-add between a hotel in the city and a bed-and-breakfast in the country? If the rural business makes furniture that people take back to the city, which way is the value going?
- EliRivers 9y ago
  When I spend money, it's not to get equal value. I spend money because what I get for it is worth more to me than the money. Maybe everyone else is swapping money for something of equal value, but I doubt it. People spend money because they value the thing they buy more than the money in their hand.