rural idiocy

[Wojtek Sokolowski]

At 11:14 AM 5/8/98 -0500, Yoshie wrote:
>Wojtek wrote:
>>At 09:34 AM 5/7/98 -0500, Yoshie wrote:
>>>Michael Hoover wrote:
>>>>Areas of Residence 1950-1990
>>>>Source: U.S. Dept of Commerce, Bureau of the Census,  _Statistical
>>>>Abstracts of the United States_
>>>>
>>>>1950:
>>>>Central Cities (City): 33%
>>>>Suburbs: 23%
>>>>Outside Metropolitan Statistical Area (Rural): 44%
>>>>
>>>>1970:
>>>>City: 31%
>>>>Suburbs: 37%
>>>>Rural: 31%
>>>>
>>>>1990:
>>>>City: 31%
>>>>Suburbs: 46%
>>>>Rural: 23%
>>>
>>>Stats provided by Michael says that the most significant change is not
>>>out-migration from cities to suburbs but depopulation of rural areas and/or
>>>what used to be rural areas developping into suburbs.
>>
>>I thought about that too, but not necessarily.  The pricing of suburban and
>>urban residences suggests a different pattern: rural migrants moving to the
>>cities where housing costs are lower than in the suburbs.  Manhattan,
>>Boston or San Francisco might be excpetions, but that ceratinly holds for
>>other cities.
>
>Wojtek's hypothesis doesn't seem to explain the changes in areas of
>residence covered by the stats from the period 1950-1990, however, in that
>the proportion of city residents shows a decline while that of suburbanites
>records an increase, according to the figures provided.

But of course former urban residents moving to burbs which explains the
relatively stable share of the urban population.  That is certainly true in
Baltimore that faced an inlfux of the rural poor (Black) and the
simultaneous white flight to the burbs.  I thought it was self-explanatory.


>I think that a large scale migration from rural areas to cities took place
>earlier, from the end of the Civil War to the periods before that of the
>above stats.

So what happens to those garment workers in North Carolina and kindred
souls after their factories are closed and moved south of the border?  Do
you really think they move to D.C. burbs?  

Regards,

Wojtek