3 ms·
> What you call misery, others call home, and have an attachment to the land. Mostly, people aren't moving to better communities because they can't. In a good
by WarOnPrivacy 3y ago
> What you call misery, others call home, and have an attachment to the land.
Mostly, people aren't moving to better communities because they can't.
In a good year, a typical relocation requires stacks of available cash and jobs waiting at the other end for every working member of the household. And those jobs need to add up to the living expenses at the destination.
If you're a household that needs to move to survive, the odds are quite low you have the resources at hand to make that happen.
- jfengel 3y agoI'm a big fan of programs which help pay for both those relocations and the educations to help the transition. I'm not a fan of holding the economy and the environment hostage because they have a traditional "attachment" to something that makes the world a worse place.
- WarOnPrivacy 3y agoNo argument from me. I just wanted to clarify that while moving is an impossibility, all other reasons for staying are moot.
- rayiner 3y agoDon’t underestimate people’s attachment to their homes. Only 1/3 of people in sub-Saharan Africa say they would emigrate to another country if they had the choice: https://news.gallup.com/poll/245255/750-million-worldwide-migrate.aspx https://news.gallup.com/poll/245255/750-million-worldwide-mi.... In South Asia it’s under 10%. Is it a surprise people in rural Ohio want to stay put? Indeed the desire to stay near home is probably strongest for those with the fewest resources. For skilled, educated people, emigration is often an adventure. Exciting opportunities await you in the new place. But if you’re a low skill worker in Ohio, what does moving to San Francisco get you? What do you get for leaving your friends and family behind? Better chances to get a service job waiting on some Facebook engineers?