Comments on: Urban-Rural Political Alliances Hurt Cities

By: starleys

starleys — Thu, 24 Apr 2014 05:56:00 +0000

In truth the only evidence I see in your article in support of Urban vs Rural is your personal preference.

By the way, urban infrastructure, in fact all infrastructure support by definition is to geographic areas. And SNAP is individual or family. How you define them as different in urban and rural is beyond me.

And I fail to see how cultural diversity has anything to do with fund allocation unless you feel cities have a right to more money as they have more ethnicity. How does that make a difference?

And innovation? I will question that as much development has come from rural persons as city… But in truth, it is another factor that has nothing to do with allocation unless you mean it takes more money to run the extensive intricate infrastructure of a city. Private industry innovation should be privately financed.

I have no idea how you are defining Urban vs Rural so I can not argue either way on most enterprising. But I will say we have more fishing, hunting, hiking, dirt trails, park land, and so my general opinion is we win on more to offer the whole person.

By: starleys

starleys — Thu, 24 Apr 2014 05:34:00 +0000

Your premise is that Urban living is better for society. My premise is they are dependent on Rural society for their very existence. All the resources necessary to support urban come from rural communities including energy, food, and natural resources. So, since Urban is already getting more money per capita, you have a questionable thesis that there is a disadvantage to a “fair share” basis to rural communities.

By: #PAGov: Allyson Schwartz's Food Stamp Vote is a BFD - Keystone Politics

#PAGov: Allyson Schwartz's Food Stamp Vote is a BFD - Keystone Politics — Mon, 03 Feb 2014 17:50:09 +0000

[…] traditional logic of doing SNAP and farm subsidies in one big “Farm Bill” is a political grand bargain between urban lawmakers and rural lawmakers. Tie an urban and rural interest (food stamps) to a rural interest (farm subsidies) and […]

By: Emily Washington

Emily Washington — Sun, 21 Jul 2013 17:49:00 +0000

Thanks for pointing that out — that statistic is clearly inaccurate. Now corrected.

By: The farm in your backyard (literally): Moon Rabbit Urban Farm | Attire stuff

Sat, 20 Jul 2013 17:27:17 +0000

[…] Read more… […]

By: CityBeautiful21

CityBeautiful21 — Fri, 19 Jul 2013 13:21:00 +0000

The prior author in the linked piece has bungled Glaeser’s message. There is no way that the NYC, LA, and Chicago MSAs produce 80% of US economic activity. The Wikipedia list of cities by GDP put these places at about $2.5 billion of GDP in an economy of $15 billion. This is about 18% of the economy produced by 13-14% of the people. This validates the returns to density thesis, and does not invalidate the point about rural-urban alliances being mostly beneficial for the rural folks. Still, please check the numbers next time.