5 ms·

Part of this has to do with how we've been able to drive down agricultural costs by means of automation over the last century which has driven a move away from

Part of this has to do with how we've been able to drive down agricultural costs by means of automation over the last century which has driven a move away from family farms to larger corporate farms. In 1900, just under 40 percent of the total US population lived on farms, and 60 percent lived in rural areas. Today, the respective figures are only about 1 percent and 20 percent.[1] Sure the coasts are creating more economic output by far, but people need to eat food. Agriculture is always going to be important, but lot less people are involved in it than ever before. This is part of what's led to the urban/rural divide where the rural folks feel left out - there just aren't as many of them as populations have migrated to cities. This is why people in rural areas feel increasingly left out. It's mostly due to economic forces that are out of their control. [1] http://jaysonlusk.com/blog/2016/6/26/the-evolution-of-american-agriculture http://jaysonlusk.com/blog/2016/6/26/the-evolution-of-americ...

URSpider94 5y ago
I definitely don't think we should ignore or minimize the contributions of rural Americans. I do think we need to do a better job of making the costs associated with rural life more explicit. This is a big deal in California, where people have pushed further and further into the wilderness, putting themselves at huge risk for wildfires while also increasing the number of miles of power lines that need to be built and maintained; these very power lines are one of the main causes of wildfires.
- causality0 5y ago
  New power lines are almost never the cause of wildfires. Old, poorly-maintained lines are. For example, the Camp fire that killed 86 people was caused by a hundred year old line that hadn't been serviced in decades. For miles of line around the origin site of the fire the C-hooks looked like this: https://i.imgur.com/r42KsHR.jpg https://i.imgur.com/r42KsHR.jpg
  - ethbr0 5y ago
    Total installed powerline length vs population is a problem. Whether they're new / old or well / poorly serviced is just a difference of a few decades. If there isn't money to service old lines now, then there won't be money to service formerly-new lines in 30 years.
    - causality0 5y ago
      It's not a question of insufficient funds. They spent five billion dollars on shareholder dividends while corporate documents show they were completely aware the equipment was breaking down and posed a wildfire risk, and they broke multiple state regulations to do so.
      - d110af5ccf 5y ago
        Some background to add to the above: https://twitter.com/tubetimeus/status/1306366930899460097 https://twitter.com/tubetimeus/status/1306366930899460097 and https://www.buttecounty.net/Portals/30/CFReport/PGE-THE-CAMP-FIRE-PUBLIC-REPORT.pdf https://www.buttecounty.net/Portals/30/CFReport/PGE-THE-CAMP...
        zbrozek 5y ago
        The Camp fire report was riveting after-work reading. The financial engineering to avoid opex and instead magnify capex as a way to bilk the ratepayer is ingenious and evil. Further, their operating procedures and culture seem carefully engineered as a liability dodge. Read the report, it's amazing.
ghaff 5y ago
You have to be careful with the 80/20 US Census split numbers between urban/rural. Between myself and a couple neighbors, we're on 100 acres next to even more conservation land. One neighbor has an apple orchard. Another a Christmas tree farm. The town I'm in is considered urban because we're near a major city and adjacent to another small city.
- philistine 5y ago
  But you are urban. You are near a major city, and adjacent another small one like you said. Urban versus rural is not a measure of closeness to nature, it's a measure of closeness to other humans.
  - ghaff 5y ago
    It depends on your definitions. A lot of people would object to defining urban as encompassing having to drive anywhere except to connect to immediate neighbors. I can basically go to my two immediate neighbors. Otherwise I have to get in a car. Is that urban?
    - thoughtstheseus 5y ago
      Sounds like a suburb. The real inefficient structures.
      - briefcomment 5y ago
        In what suburb do you have only two neighbors within walking distance?
        mrcartmenez 5y ago
        Does America have a concept of walking distance?
        ghaff 5y ago
u801e 5y ago
This has also happened to manufacturing and coal mining to a certain extent. But, unlike agriculture, the demand for certain resources like coal is significantly less than it used to be, but people in the affected areas haven't been able to find work in other fields.
- xxpor 5y ago
  Because they're not willing to move.
  - u801e 5y ago
    It takes money to move, and it's unlikely they have the financial resources to handle living in an area with a significantly higher cost of living, unless the job pays very well. Given the fact that public school graduation rates are relatively low where they live, it's unlikely they would be able to secure one of those high paying jobs if they don't have at least a high school diploma or GED.
threatofrain 5y ago
But only a slim slice of rural living is on farms, or are you talking about immigrant Latinos who are left out of the political picture? The supermajority of people working American farms and meat shops are Latino immigrants.
4cidix 5y ago
this is nonsense. SALT deductions make it so that the wealthy (including limousine liberals) don't pay taxes
maxerickson 5y ago
Farms have gotten bigger, but family farms still dominate. https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/farm-economy/farm-structure-and-organization/farm-structure/ https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/farm-economy/farm-structure-... I guess you can argue that a large closely held company isn't a family farm, but it isn't what "corporate" is meant to conjure up either.
- relaxing 5y ago
  The majority of production comes from a small minority of farms with > $1MM ARR. Most are still family owned, but I would argue they are “what corporate is meant to conjure up” in the sense of the scale and methods driving the farming operation (just not the legal structure and governance.) That’s why the overall number of farms and farmers has gone down - the little guy can’t make it work economically.
  - maxerickson 5y ago
    But they are the little guys, they just swallowed a few neighbors. People complaining about corporate farming are talking about outside money coming in and taking the land.

URSpider94 5y ago

I definitely don't think we should ignore or minimize the contributions of rural Americans. I do think we need to do a better job of making the costs associated with rural life more explicit. This is a big deal in California, where people have pushed further and further into the wilderness, putting themselves at huge risk for wildfires while also increasing the number of miles of power lines that need to be built and maintained; these very power lines are one of the main causes of wildfires.

causality0 5y ago
New power lines are almost never the cause of wildfires. Old, poorly-maintained lines are. For example, the Camp fire that killed 86 people was caused by a hundred year old line that hadn't been serviced in decades. For miles of line around the origin site of the fire the C-hooks looked like this: https://i.imgur.com/r42KsHR.jpg https://i.imgur.com/r42KsHR.jpg
- ethbr0 5y ago
  Total installed powerline length vs population is a problem. Whether they're new / old or well / poorly serviced is just a difference of a few decades. If there isn't money to service old lines now, then there won't be money to service formerly-new lines in 30 years.
  - causality0 5y ago
    It's not a question of insufficient funds. They spent five billion dollars on shareholder dividends while corporate documents show they were completely aware the equipment was breaking down and posed a wildfire risk, and they broke multiple state regulations to do so.
    - d110af5ccf 5y ago
      Some background to add to the above: https://twitter.com/tubetimeus/status/1306366930899460097 https://twitter.com/tubetimeus/status/1306366930899460097 and https://www.buttecounty.net/Portals/30/CFReport/PGE-THE-CAMP-FIRE-PUBLIC-REPORT.pdf https://www.buttecounty.net/Portals/30/CFReport/PGE-THE-CAMP...
      - zbrozek 5y ago
        The Camp fire report was riveting after-work reading. The financial engineering to avoid opex and instead magnify capex as a way to bilk the ratepayer is ingenious and evil. Further, their operating procedures and culture seem carefully engineered as a liability dodge. Read the report, it's amazing.

ghaff 5y ago

You have to be careful with the 80/20 US Census split numbers between urban/rural. Between myself and a couple neighbors, we're on 100 acres next to even more conservation land. One neighbor has an apple orchard. Another a Christmas tree farm. The town I'm in is considered urban because we're near a major city and adjacent to another small city.

philistine 5y ago
But you are urban. You are near a major city, and adjacent another small one like you said. Urban versus rural is not a measure of closeness to nature, it's a measure of closeness to other humans.
- ghaff 5y ago
  It depends on your definitions. A lot of people would object to defining urban as encompassing having to drive anywhere except to connect to immediate neighbors. I can basically go to my two immediate neighbors. Otherwise I have to get in a car. Is that urban?
  - thoughtstheseus 5y ago
    Sounds like a suburb. The real inefficient structures.
    - briefcomment 5y ago
      In what suburb do you have only two neighbors within walking distance?
      - mrcartmenez 5y ago
        Does America have a concept of walking distance?
        ghaff 5y ago

u801e 5y ago

This has also happened to manufacturing and coal mining to a certain extent. But, unlike agriculture, the demand for certain resources like coal is significantly less than it used to be, but people in the affected areas haven't been able to find work in other fields.

xxpor 5y ago
Because they're not willing to move.
- u801e 5y ago
  It takes money to move, and it's unlikely they have the financial resources to handle living in an area with a significantly higher cost of living, unless the job pays very well. Given the fact that public school graduation rates are relatively low where they live, it's unlikely they would be able to secure one of those high paying jobs if they don't have at least a high school diploma or GED.

threatofrain 5y ago

But only a slim slice of rural living is on farms, or are you talking about immigrant Latinos who are left out of the political picture? The supermajority of people working American farms and meat shops are Latino immigrants.

4cidix 5y ago

this is nonsense. SALT deductions make it so that the wealthy (including limousine liberals) don't pay taxes

maxerickson 5y ago

Farms have gotten bigger, but family farms still dominate. https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/farm-economy/farm-structure-and-organization/farm-structure/ https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/farm-economy/farm-structure-... I guess you can argue that a large closely held company isn't a family farm, but it isn't what "corporate" is meant to conjure up either.

relaxing 5y ago
The majority of production comes from a small minority of farms with > $1MM ARR. Most are still family owned, but I would argue they are “what corporate is meant to conjure up” in the sense of the scale and methods driving the farming operation (just not the legal structure and governance.) That’s why the overall number of farms and farmers has gone down - the little guy can’t make it work economically.
- maxerickson 5y ago
  But they are the little guys, they just swallowed a few neighbors. People complaining about corporate farming are talking about outside money coming in and taking the land.