3 ms·

I don't get why we want to build stuff in rural areas. From a cost perspective, we have to subsidize the infrastructure including medical and utilities. From

by adrr 6y ago

I don't get why we want to build stuff in rural areas. From a cost perspective, we have to subsidize the infrastructure including medical and utilities. From economic standpoint, the jobs are in the cities. Labor participation rates in cities is much higher than rural areas. Investing in housing cost reductions in urban areas seems like a better investment than wiring rural areas with high speed internet.

briHass 6y ago
"Jobs are in the cities" Yeah, except for agriculture, energy production, mining, large manufacturing, warehousing and other critical industries that city dwellers like to forget exist. All of these require people, and those people need to live somewhere near their place of work.
- adrr 6y ago
  There's not a lot of them and as a percentage of total jobs, it is declining every year. Projects should be determined by ROI and be forward looking. Focusing on urban areas where it we get bigger multiplier on our economy and is forwarding looking as that is where the jobs are being created. We have lots of people in rural areas with no jobs and we have urban areas which have labor shortages. https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/rural-economy-population/employment-education/rural-employment-and-unemployment/ https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/rural-economy-population/emp...
Jarwain 6y ago
Not all the jobs are in the cities. I'd imagine rural areas have a lot of large-scale farming that would be expensive to do in the city. Tons of people also grow up in rural areas; access to high speed internet would probably be useful for their development and maybe even innovation in these areas. Personally I see high speed internet as a way to integrate people who may not be geographically close to each other; this includes those living in rural areas.
free_rms 6y ago
Because they're people too, and it winds up being profitable for everyone. It took New Deal politicians dragging the electric companies kicking and screaming to get rural eras electrified, because the companies didn't think there'd be enough usage to justify the wiring. Turns out, once it's available, people use it, and it was profitable.
Wohlf 6y ago
You could say the same thing about any government subsidy. Why subsidize the poor when the wealthy generate most of the tax revenue, why should single people subsidize children, etc.
- adrr 6y ago
  There's poor people in cities as well. This is more like should be invest in fossil fuels vs green energy. Cities is where the job growth is at. Propping up rural would be like propping up the coal industry.
Klinky 6y ago
Are jobs in the cities anymore? Jobs downtown in an expensive office building for information workers to basically do the same work they're doing at home right now seems like an artificial and outdated constraint. Why are we propping up concentrated urban cores with their congestion, pollution, expense/inflation?
- buttersbrian 6y ago
  If jobs were in vacuums, I'd agree. More importantly, lives are not in a vacuum and might have physical constraints. Perhaps I want to live in a city (congestion, pollution that comes with it) because the lifestyle and culture I prefer blossoms in a more urban area.
  - Klinky 6y ago
    I think you could still develop that culture within town centers and density wouldn't necessarily go away completely, but ideally you could find most of what you need in your neighborhood, ideally by just walking. A dense urban core that is too expensive to live in, and requires a long commute, is not healthy or within a lot of people's lifestyle goals.

by adrr 6y ago

briHass 6y ago

"Jobs are in the cities" Yeah, except for agriculture, energy production, mining, large manufacturing, warehousing and other critical industries that city dwellers like to forget exist. All of these require people, and those people need to live somewhere near their place of work.

adrr 6y ago
There's not a lot of them and as a percentage of total jobs, it is declining every year. Projects should be determined by ROI and be forward looking. Focusing on urban areas where it we get bigger multiplier on our economy and is forwarding looking as that is where the jobs are being created. We have lots of people in rural areas with no jobs and we have urban areas which have labor shortages. https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/rural-economy-population/employment-education/rural-employment-and-unemployment/ https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/rural-economy-population/emp...

Jarwain 6y ago

Not all the jobs are in the cities. I'd imagine rural areas have a lot of large-scale farming that would be expensive to do in the city. Tons of people also grow up in rural areas; access to high speed internet would probably be useful for their development and maybe even innovation in these areas. Personally I see high speed internet as a way to integrate people who may not be geographically close to each other; this includes those living in rural areas.

free_rms 6y ago

Because they're people too, and it winds up being profitable for everyone. It took New Deal politicians dragging the electric companies kicking and screaming to get rural eras electrified, because the companies didn't think there'd be enough usage to justify the wiring. Turns out, once it's available, people use it, and it was profitable.

Wohlf 6y ago

You could say the same thing about any government subsidy. Why subsidize the poor when the wealthy generate most of the tax revenue, why should single people subsidize children, etc.

adrr 6y ago
There's poor people in cities as well. This is more like should be invest in fossil fuels vs green energy. Cities is where the job growth is at. Propping up rural would be like propping up the coal industry.

Klinky 6y ago

Are jobs in the cities anymore? Jobs downtown in an expensive office building for information workers to basically do the same work they're doing at home right now seems like an artificial and outdated constraint. Why are we propping up concentrated urban cores with their congestion, pollution, expense/inflation?

buttersbrian 6y ago
If jobs were in vacuums, I'd agree. More importantly, lives are not in a vacuum and might have physical constraints. Perhaps I want to live in a city (congestion, pollution that comes with it) because the lifestyle and culture I prefer blossoms in a more urban area.
- Klinky 6y ago
  I think you could still develop that culture within town centers and density wouldn't necessarily go away completely, but ideally you could find most of what you need in your neighborhood, ideally by just walking. A dense urban core that is too expensive to live in, and requires a long commute, is not healthy or within a lot of people's lifestyle goals.