PDA

View Full Version : Rural-Urban Divide



Keith Wilson
04-14-2017, 04:50 PM
There's a really good article by Tom Edsall in the NY Times (link here (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/13/opinion/reaching-out-to-the-voters-the-left-left-behind.html?_r=0)).

The beginning:


The devastating recession that began at the end of 2007 and officially ended in June 2009 was the most severe downturn since World War II.

The political, social and even medical consequences of this recession have been duly noted, but even so the depths of its effects are only now becoming clear. One we’re still learning more about is how the rural, less populated regions of the country (known among demographers as nonmetropolitan counties), which already suffered from higher than average poverty rates, recovered from the recession at a far slower pace than more populous metropolitan counties.

The fact that people living outside big cities were battered so acutely by the recession goes a long way toward explaining President Trump’s victory in the last election.

And the essential graphs:

https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-mRG1FdfEkQI/WPDiRSGaG_I/AAAAAAAAFW8/avHQSFsSYtweKRxFItaBRyOPgYj3Ym4jACLcB/s1600/Uneven%2Brecovery.png

http://www.oftwominds.com/photos2016/new-biz-counties6-16.png

http://www.governmentalwaysfails.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Deaton3-1024x749.jpg

Too Little Time
04-14-2017, 05:26 PM
I think you misplaced this link: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/13/opinion/reaching-out-to-the-voters-the-left-left-behind.html?_r=0

That was a good article. There was another good map that used education level and income as colors at the zip code level. It shows the same disparity. Found it:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/local/2013/11/09/washington-a-world-apart/?utm_term=.1007bd339d94

Joe (SoCal)
04-14-2017, 05:28 PM
All this accurate news from the "Failing NYT" ;)

Keith Wilson
04-14-2017, 05:36 PM
Glad you liked it. I thought it made some excellent points. I fixed the link.

Here's another interesting map: The Gini coefficient is crude, but still . . .

https://urplsc366erkulwater.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/1gini-us-by-county.png

Too Little Time
04-14-2017, 05:45 PM
Glad you liked it. I thought it made some excellent points. I fixed the link.

Here's another interesting map: The Gini coefficient is crude, but still . . .
This is the zip code level map I referred to above: http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/local/2013/11/09/washington-a-world-apart/?utm_term=.1007bd339d94

These maps cause one to think about how much of a melting pot the country is. More like a crucible where the goal is to separate the valuable metal from the impurities.

Joe (SoCal)
04-14-2017, 05:54 PM
like a crucible where the goal is to separate the valuable metal from the impurities.

Incredibly interesting analogy

Keith Wilson
04-14-2017, 05:54 PM
Interesting map, definitely. It looks very much like a view from space at night, with the big cities illuminated. I think the Washington DC area is like it is because relatively there aren't very many blue-collar jobs compared to other similar-size cities.

David W Pratt
04-14-2017, 09:01 PM
Any helpful suggestions for interpreting the GINI map?

Too Little Time
04-14-2017, 09:23 PM
Any helpful suggestions for interpreting the GINI map?
https://peterslarson.com/2010/12/14/income-inequality-in-the-us/

The red ares have more local income inequality. The blue areas have less.

Joe (SoCal)
04-14-2017, 09:27 PM
What gets me is California is kinda salmon colored. I know the red sections i'm in one :(

Keith Wilson
04-15-2017, 09:30 AM
Any helpful suggestions for interpreting the GINI map?Two things jump out at me: There are red dots for cities where lots of very rich people live, New York, San Francisco, and LA particularly (as Joe says). The other thing is how you can clearly pick out two regions; Appalachia, (the SW-NE diagonal blob through Kentucky), and the former slave/plantation economy of the deep south (the tidewater parts of VA, NC, SC, and Georgia, all of Mississippi, Alabama, and Louisiana and parts of Texas). In fact, you can almost draw the borders of the Confederacy from this map. History has a very long shadow sometimes.

Another map, this one from American Nations, an interesting book by Colin Woodward. (Link (https://www.amazon.com/American-Nations-History-Regional-Cultures/dp/0143122029)) It looks a lot like the Gini map, doesn't it? History;s long shadow, again. Interestingly, while looking for a copy of the map to post, I found it on several seriously crackpot sites claiming it's all genetic, with adulatory references to John Derbyshire and other neo-racists.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/11/10/article-2497613-1951789A00000578-778_964x667.jpg

Too Little Time
04-15-2017, 12:31 PM
Two things jump out at me: There are red dots for cities where lots of very rich people live, New York, San Francisco, and LA particularly (as Joe says). The other thing is how you can clearly pick out two regions; Appalachia, (the SW-NE diagonal blob through Kentucky), and the former slave/plantation economy of the deep south (the tidewater parts of VA, NC, SC, and Georgia, all of Mississippi, Alabama, and Louisiana and parts of Texas). In fact, you can almost draw the borders of the Confederacy from this map. History has a very long shadow sometimes.
I think you see too much in the GINI map.

The GINI coefficient does not tell us the relative wealth of the counties. We could have poor counties with little inequality and rich counties - where the poor there are better off than the poor in the poor counties, with great inequality.

It is worthwhile to note that near most rich zip codes there are very poor zip codes. That is certainly not due to former slave/plantation economies. It is due to the fact that people want to live near others of the same economic condition.

oznabrag
04-15-2017, 12:36 PM
I think you see too much in the GINI map.

The GINI coefficient does not tell us the relative wealth of the counties. We could have poor counties with little inequality and rich counties - where the poor there are better off than the poor in the poor counties, with great inequality.

It is worthwhile to note that near most rich zip codes there are very poor zip codes. That is certainly not due to former slave/plantation economies. It is due to the fact that people want to live near others of the same economic condition.

Really?

Izzat why the maps all show the former Confederacy as a hotbed of racism, economic inequality and the exploitation of enforced ignorance?

Izzat why the maps all show that the disease has metastasized to infect the whole country?


Wow!

Keith Wilson
04-15-2017, 12:55 PM
The GINI coefficient does not tell us the relative wealth of the counties. We could have poor counties with little inequality and rich counties - where the poor there are better off than the poor in the poor counties, with great inequality.That's true; it's why LA and Manhattan and San Francisco have high Gini coefficients. But the fact that most of the old Confederacy, even outside the bigger cities where most of the rich folks live, also has high numbers is suggestive, don't you think? I doubt rural Kentucky or Alabama is red on the map because those places are prosperous, but the rich folks there are astoundingly rich.

Too Little Time
04-15-2017, 09:23 PM
Really?

Izzat why the maps all show the former Confederacy as a hotbed of racism, economic inequality and the exploitation of enforced ignorance?

Izzat why the maps all show that the disease has metastasized to infect the whole country?


Wow!

That's true; it's why LA and Manhattan and San Francisco have high Gini coefficients. But the fact that most of the old Confederacy, even outside the bigger cities where most of the rich folks live, also has high numbers is suggestive, don't you think? I doubt rural Kentucky or Alabama is red on the map because those places are prosperous, but the rich folks there are astoundingly rich.
I prefer to consider recent history. There seems to be a story about the federal government practicing discrimination that resulted in segregation in housing and schools. Not just in the South, but in the entire country.
Not just by Republicans but by Democrats. There seems to be federal court decision in the mid 80's that went against the federal government when it tried to defend discrimination. I am sure there have been Democratic presidents who failed to comply with the federal court decision. Clinton and Obama come to mind.

Complying with the court decision required an extraordinary amount of work: telling the Attorney General to follow the court decision.

For the last 30 years and decades prior you both have watched the federal government and most of the North practice discrimination and segregation. My words here seem to support the fact that it was much more than just some Southerners in one region of the country.

oznabrag
04-15-2017, 10:33 PM
I prefer to consider recent history. There seems to be a story about the federal government practicing discrimination that resulted in segregation in housing and schools. Not just in the South, but in the entire country.
Not just by Republicans but by Democrats. There seems to be federal court decision in the mid 80's that went against the federal government when it tried to defend discrimination. I am sure there have been Democratic presidents who failed to comply with the federal court decision. Clinton and Obama come to mind.

Complying with the court decision required an extraordinary amount of work: telling the Attorney General to follow the court decision.

For the last 30 years and decades prior you both have watched the federal government and most of the North practice discrimination and segregation. My words here seem to support the fact that it was much more than just some Southerners in one region of the country.

Go ahead and read up on it, and I'll take it up with you in a few years, k?

Keith Wilson
04-16-2017, 09:45 AM
This is not about racial discrimination; that's another subject altogether. The original point of the thread is the rual-urban political and economic divide, and the patterns of economic inequality. So tell me why you can pick out the borders on the Confederacy on the Gini coefficient map 150 years later?

And many things that seem to be are not.

Too Little Time
04-16-2017, 10:21 AM
This is not about racial discrimination; that's another subject altogether. The original point of the thread is the rual-urban political and economic divide, and the patterns of economic inequality. So tell me why you can pick out the borders on the Confederacy on the Gini coefficient map 150 years later?

And many things that seem to be are not.
You brought up slavery which many might think is either racial discrimination or the roots of it. You knew where the borders were, so you saw them.

I guess you believe that "the patterns of economic inequality" have little to nothing to do with providing poor schools for blacks in urban areas. You cannot deflect from your thesis because you don't like the counter argument.


Go ahead and read up on it, and I'll take it up with you in a few years, k?
Not ok. You brought up the south and its responsibility. Argue your support for a longstanding government policy of discrimination and segregation.

oznabrag
04-16-2017, 10:34 AM
You brought up slavery which many might think is either racial discrimination or the roots of it. You knew where the borders were, so you saw them.

You have it backwards. Racism was the justification for slavery.



I guess you believe that "the patterns of economic inequality" have little to nothing to do with providing poor schools for blacks in urban areas. You cannot deflect from your thesis because you don't like the counter argument.

I guess you DON'T believe that "the patterns of economic inequality" have little to nothing to do with providing poor schools for blacks in urban areas?

What?

When you disentangle that knot of pretzel logic, let us know.


Not ok. You brought up the south and its responsibility. Argue your support for a longstanding government policy of discrimination and segregation.

I'll leave such argument to the Republicans.

They have lots of practice.