A survey of rural and urban Americans

I’m curious how many of the rural bashers on the first page or two of this thread actually live in rural America. The condescension is rather annoying to those of us that do. Some of the posters seemed to coming straight from recently printed articles and NBC Nightly News series on opiates.

@Himom One-pot meth is not difficult to cook, but it extremely explosive. It is difficult and expensive to remediate in housing as it infiltrates everything. Landlords are left with worthless houses. Police routinely arrest people cooking it in cars with kids in the backseat. Cops on the Meth Team are basically in hazmat suits. My county put in strict controls on Sudafed, and did cut down on cooking…but it didn’t change the meth rate. Now it’s just crystal imported from Mexico.

There are meat packing towns where the union was busted and the town’s population went from 95% white to 70% Hispanic in ~15 years. It is a huge cost on the social network, schools, etc.

I do agree with the survey that many rural Americans feel a disproportional share of federal/state dollars and attention go to major metropolitan areas. At least in my state, statistics support that statement.

There was the exact same rhetoric/“concern” over “how much room” the US had from the Know-Nothing movement back in the 1850’s and fears about “popery” vis a vis the large influx of Irish Catholic immigrants in the mid-19th century.

Especially considering the Irish Catholic immigrant population influx was so large in that period that it doubled dramatically at least twice over and literally changed the landscape of many areas including major NE cities like NYC and Boston within a decade.

And if we went back further to the 1790’s, some early anti-immigrant minded Americans asked the same rhetorical question when the total US population was far less…

Nice. One uncle served as a translator for the US/UN armed forces during the Korean War.

I’m not sure how much we can assume this, especially in regards to overdoses.

http://content.govdelivery.com/attachments/USDOJDEA/2016/07/22/file_attachments/590360/fentanyl%2Bpills%2Breport.pdf

@cobrat – I’m talking about right now. As I look across the CONUS (having done tons of analysis of visible satellite imagery lately) you have fairly significant urbanization of the eastern half of the country (with south Florida being the best example of a Borg planet, if you remember Star Trek: The Next Generation). Most of the western half is uninhabitable without intense infrastructure work (water, etc.). Where I live, north of Atlanta, we’re constantly under outdoor watering bans even though we have a large reservoir nearby. Much of that infrastructure was built during the Great Depression, do we want to go back to that awful time?

Other the other hand, look at the Korean peninsula. RK is a modern country while North Korea is visibly different. This is at the Landsat 30 meter/pixel resolution during the daytime I use, never mind the nighttime emptiness up there. It would take me about 20 seconds to invest in a North Korea mutual fund if they were to throw off the shackles of a Communist government there.

I live in a rural county with a population size stagnant for the last 100 years. Two recent immigrant groups came from the Ukraine and Central America, the latter gravitating to work in our dairy farms. When I sub in our schools I’ve noticed that their children are bright and talented, but the language barrier will hold them back for a few years.

We seldom talk about these immigrants except to point out the beautiful church one of the groups built in my neighborhood, or of having seen a few workers in the store buying cell phone minutes. We have lost nearly all of our large manufacturers so there are not many reasons why anyone would move here.

But meth labs dot our neighborhoods just like in many urban areas. One blew up upstairs from a main street store in our city, and another burned down a three-story historic building on main street in the nearby village killing a few people.

There are several reasons why I remain here. I never lock my car, never lock the doors to my house, know and trust many neighbors, wear whatever I want, and never have to mention either my education or my past experiences. You can’t group all rural residents into one mindless herd.

As nice as it would be to lump everyone who lives in rural areas into one bucket and assume they are stupid it is unfortunately not that simple. My experience is that oftentimes if you take the time to speak with people in the rural communities they are not against legal immigrants. Rural communities often believe in following rules and therefore do not think it is right for people to come here illegally. There is a process in place that should be followed. I share these views and am all for legal immigration to the extent it is needed and I think we need a mix of immigrants.

I do not live in a rural community. However, I can also say with certainty, that communities dealing with large numbers of illegal immigrants are impacted in some very negative ways (as well as many positive ways), and anyone who isn’t respectful and sensitive to that has no idea what he or she is talking about and should get informed.

Interesting turn of a phrase. People who don’t conform to the party line about immigration are neither mindless nor animals. They simply disagree.

Lewiston, Maine comes to mind. They have had a huge influx of Somali immigrants. This is a very thoughtful article about how it’s affected the town, positively and negatively: https://apnews.com/7f2b534b80674596875980b9b6e701c9

The article states that for the first time in 30 years, the county that Lewiston is in voted for a Republican for President (wouldn’t that be 28 or 32 years?).

Very interesting. Thank you!

Most illegal immigrants are good folks individually (except those who are not, and there are more of those these days due to gang violence), sometimes cultures do clash. In my area, there was a very well publicized rash of crime against illegals coming from Central America. What didn’t get publicized was that the issue was that this particular group was virulently racist against black people (and treating black women in very inappropriate ways) and had been settled by do-gooder groups (including mine) in a predominantly black area. It was not pretty and if the numbers had been small enough to provide more support, it might not have happened. But it did, and we have to remember that not every home culture shares our experience and values. I have personally seen situations where people (both legal and illegal immigrants) came to communities that were of ethnicities they were completely unfamiliar with and there were clashes based on lack of information. It’s not an easy thing, it’s really not. There is a Somali woman who commutes on my express bus who causes trouble almost every day because she doesn’t want to sit next to non-believers, and emphatically refuses to sit next to men on a crowded bus unless she is threatened with removal. She is sincere in her beliefs, but they can’t be accommodated in the situation. She is not a bad person, and the men who are commuting aren’t bad people, either. Everyone should be respected, even rural people who are telling about their own personal situations.

“The question I never hear answers by the pro-immigration side is: do we need more people in this country? A related question is, with the decline in manufacturing jobs: do we need more low-skilled workers in this country?”

Nice fake questions, @droppedit . Your subsequent posts make clear you know perfectly well the standard answer to the first question. Yes, we do need more people in this country. Our native population is aging and not replacing itself (and the situation would probably be worse if you factored out some relatively fringe native groups with high growth rates, like ultra-orthodox Jews). Without immigration, our demographic situation would be as bleak as Japan’s. If you want to see what rural decline could look like, look there. It is a wealthy country with crowded cities, but there are many places where houses and land literally have no value, and the population is not sufficient to sustain basic social infrastructure (schools, police, roads) without massive subsidies. Thanks to immigration, our social security system and Medicare probably won’t collapse. Thanks to immigration, we will continue to have a strong military. Thanks to immigration, at least some parts of rural America will thrive.

As to whether we need more low-skilled workers, I don’t think anyone argues that we should be rejecting high-skilled people in favor of low-skilled people. But there are still industries – a great deal of agriculture in those rural places, for example – which have a tremendous need for low-skilled, low-wage labor that has never been met by the native population, even during the Depression when some portion of the low-skilled native population became highly mobile. I’m sure that low-skilled immigrant labor, especially illegal immigrant labor, makes it harder for low-skilled natives to earn a living in areas where they actually compete, but it sure looks like, over any reasonably medium- and long-term period, the additional productivity represented by immigrants, even low-skilled ones, expands the economy and creates more opportunity, not less.

Also, over time, low-skilled workers turn into high-skilled workers. One of my great-grandparents came here as a 15-year-old with at best a 7th-grade education that included no math besides arithmetic. He died a wealthy businessman. His six children got bachelor’s degrees from Harvard and three of the Seven Sisters; one of them (also a Harvard PhD) was a Federal Reserve Board governor, another a respected doctor.

And maintaining an immigration system under which lots of low-skilled immigrants are illegal plays a huge part in suppressing wages for low-skilled workers, since illegal workers can’t effectively claim legal protections like minimum wage or overtime pay, not to mention joining unions. Illegal immigrants effectively pay kickbacks to employers to hire them, something native workers generally don’t do. The culprit there is not the immigrants; it’s the cumbersome legal immigration system that effectively creates supernormal profit opportunities for employers willing to take risks. (Much as alcohol prohibition, drug prohibition, and gambling prohibitions fund organized crime.

When my great-grandparents came here, they were not welcomed with open arms. They were not in a favored group, and they did not have valuable skills. But they didn’t face anything like the oppressive, exhausting, irrational immigration system we have now.

JHS, as I said earlier, I work with illegal immigrants by choice. I am proud of that.

But the time over which many in this specific era go on to become high-skilled workers is at least three generations. When I started my work, the immigrants were different - the stereotype of family people who wanted to work hard and make better lives and then succeeded was absolutely true. It is sad and unpleasant to say, but it is still true that many of the immigrants coming now are people who lack fluency in English OR Spanish and have no history of literacy in any language. I can’t stress to you enough how hard that is to deal with, particularly in our high-tech, fast-paced world. It is a very big problem and very well known among the people who work with immigrants. Again, it doesn’t make them bad people, but their kids aren’t able to be fully educated, and their grandchildren are being left behind, as well. And there is no amount of money or effort that can rectify this quickly.

Immigration is very different now than in prior generations, and we have to be honest about that. The people I’m talking about are prey to all sorts of victimization, all sorts of difficulties, and all sorts of resentments. It’s HARD.

^ Funny. I work with immigrants as well and live in an area where many, many are settled. I haven’t seen it take generations. I’ve seen great successes. I’m seeing many kids who came 15 years ago going on to college now. The adults struggle a bit the first few years with language barriers. The children do not and assimilate very quickly, do well in school for the most part, and move up, and help their older family members assimilate. Pretty much the story of past immigrant groups - Italian, Irish, Polish, etc.

As I said, doschicos, I’ve seen a lot of successes. I’ve been part of a lot of successes, but that doesn’t make my point less true. The immigrant groups who are coming from parts of Mexico and Central America with no history of literacy in any language are not succeeding within 15 years. They just aren’t. Are you disputing that? We can’t pretend that every immigrant is the same as every other or that modern-day America is the same as America of 100 hundred years ago. There’s also the inconvenient fact that many immigrants don’t actually want to be here and resent the heck out of having no choice. If people in America who are impacted by this issue are going to be judged harshly, so should the home countries that profit from the destruction of families, communities and cultures. Because they are the actual bad guys.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/29/business/economy/storm-lake-iowa-immigrant-workers.html?smprod=nytcore-ipad&smid=nytcore-ipad-share

Very good article about how immigration is helping keep small rural town alive.

Every day there is at least one or two articles about businesses not having enough workers to do the necessary jobs to keep businesses afloat.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/texas-companies-tie-worker-shortages-to-immigration-fears/2017/06/17/6251cb14-5376-11e7-b74e-0d2785d3083d_story.html?utm_term=.dd9f9d9b4181

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/08/us/summer-jobs-visas.html?smprod=nytcore-ipad&smid=nytcore-ipad-share

http://www.latimes.com/projects/la-fi-farms-immigration/

IMO, rural areas are cutting off their noses to spite their face.

I can see a argument that the US has been complicit and in many ways encouraged illegal immigration. Businesses do it for cheap labor and democrats may see it as a way to gain votes when/if they become citizens - probably there are many other reasons too. I can see it following that since we allowed it then we should give them a path towards citizenship.

My question is do many people support open immigration to the US or just want those here to be legalized? Do you feel that anyone and everyone who wants to come and live here should be able to do so because conditions are terrible in Central America, etc? I think that if this were to happen we would millions upon millions arrive and it would be difficult to handle plus selfishly I do not want that to happen.

If you do not support open immigration then it seems you would then see the need to have a system in place to determine who can and cannot come? The current immigration system is not good but at least it is a system.

At the salaries they choose to pay.

"Businesses do it for cheap labor and democrats may see it as a way to gain votes when/if they become citizens "

Oh boy, this is really reaching. The old, blame it on the Democrats. 8-|

I think the real answer is that many of these people are unaware of how complicated the process is because they themselves have not had to go through it.

It’s not far from the truth, doschicos. Logically speaking, democrats rely on votes from the poor/marginalized groups. This demographic makes up a significant portion of their overall voter base. And to quote Seinfeld “not that there’s anything wrong with that…” but it is important to at least be aware of it.

Just to be clear: Historically, businesses do it for cheap labor, and businesses contribute both to Republicans and to Democrats. Politicians, some of them have actual policy positions, lots (most) of them say what they think the voters in their base in their district want to hear. What they do, on the other hand, is largely what their contributors want them to do, or sometimes the people who might contribute to their primary challenger if they got too unhappy. That’s on both sides of the aisle.

This is not historically a Democrat-Republican kind of issue at all. Ideologically, lots of Republicans are pro-immigration, whether it’s on neo-liberal economics grounds or support the local Chamber of Commerce grounds, while others have been playing the nativist demagogue. And Democrats look to labor unions for lots of support, groups that are hardly pro-immigration. But the Dems have also recognized that the population of immigrant voters is growing, and the Republican Party seems to be hell-bent on ceding them to the Democrats. That’s despite the fact that for all sorts of reasons immigrant voters would probably lean Republican if the national Republican figures stopped demonizing them and their relatives.