Why Small-town Americans are backwards and Cities are the future

classic rural ignorance, you need dome book larnin about what marxism is

 

Thank you for your sanity. Based on the number of outright random "attack posts" allowed to fester in this legitimate thread, it's amazing anyone is even able to discuss the issues logically at all.


Yes, Small-towns have a larger drug problem than many large cities now. There are more hard drug users in small towns now than in large white progressive cities but radical conservatives are on a dedicated mission to deny this at all cost. The reality that white progressives living in cities are sober while small-town people are all on meth and heroin is not something that would play well on Fox News to grandma in between watching the weather channel.

 

I'll grant that there are lots of us hillbillies who don't know how to logic things out in a modern based way, but sometimes it's nice to just sit in a rocker on the porch and watch the trees grow.

 

Classic, big city liberal elitism. It's what lost you an election.

 

Progressives in large cities are not only pre-occupied with drugs but aids is a major problem.

 

Wrong. White Progressives in cities do not use drugs other than weed on average, it's the minority, non-white populations that do. Nor is aids a problem at all among white progressives in cities. Again, you are uneducated on the topic. Aids is a minority issue in cities. Hilarious to think you actually think there is truly a "White Progressive City Person Aids Epidemic". Holy..

 

You must be strictly considering the white people who live in cities, many of whom moved there from small towns for work.

You must be ignoring the multitudes of minorities in the inner city who are barely literate

 

City people aren't "Elite". They are simply wealthier and more educated than you because their relatives moved away from small towns generations ago and yours did not simply put. This caused us to become wealthier and more educated in comparison to small-town peoples.

 

Hate to break it to you champ, but urban areas have more poverty than rural areas.

 

Among non-whites, sure they do. But that's only because rural areas statistically have no non-white populations at all or very little.

White City Progressives do not meet any of the radical Fox News "Anti-City Propaganda" stats that are passed off as applying to all city dwellers when in reality it's entirely based on the minority, non-white populations.

 

Did you marry an LA doll and bring her to that small town, and now she's small town, just like you?

 

Also I have to add in response to this, the reality is that poor non-whites in cities are still wealthier many times than poor rural whites. Rural areas have large portions of extremely poor white people that are far poorer than many city minorities.

 

Oh so it's a race thing huh?
How cosmopolitan of you.
And, you don't know what you're talking about.
Facts are your friend, slick.
https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2016/cb16-210.html

 

That biased article proves or disproves nothing.

-No, it's not a race thing. IDGAF about race at all. But race is a factor in all of it for sure.

 

Ok, so the census bureau is biased, huh?
Just stop dude, you've embarrassed yourself enough.

 

What are you even trying to prove by posting a random census link? You have no logic you just start throwing around links then insisting "Ah see I'm right, about what I've no clue, but you see, I am right!".


Pffftttt....

 

No, what I posted was a link that backs my claim about poverty in urban areas. Try harder next time.

 

It doesn't back you up. You throwing around poverty links when everyone in this thread, including you good sir, know very well that City people are richer and earn more than small town people.

You only bring shame to yourself by denying this.


Also, a person who lives in rural America but earns a living in a city doesn't qualify as a "Rural High Earner". That's "Evil City Money" passed off as rural money when it's not.

 

true, its the uneducated and ignorant that voted for him and there are plenty of them around.

 

I've lived in 3 small cities during my entire life. Only one of those 3 cities were anything like you've described. These cities ranged in size from 7000 to 80,000. The one bad city/town also wasn't the smallest one. I think that it really depends on where you go. Some small towns really do attract open-minded intellectuals who are nothing like you've described. They're essentially left-wing liberal enclaves. I'll admit that one of those liberal enclaves was also somewhat territorial, fearing that an influx of other liberals from neighboring megacities might create housing shortages and price locals out of their own city. But I don't think that I can agree with you on the rest.

 

There are educated wealthy people in small towns too.
Rats running around the wheel, living from paycheck to paycheck in high priced housing with no furniture and huge debt loads is not wealth.

 

City people kill each other far more often then small town people.

 

Married a great woman. We're very happy. Loves our town. And you? Let me guess. Did you marry the town ho?

 

Yes.

And the suburbs also have many highly educated people.

 

It's not loud mouthed and rude, it's raw fact that you and other internet republican troll squads cannot stand is all.


I'm a normal middle class person. I have my own house. So the idea put forth that I'm living with roommates or homeless is pure internet troll nonsense and it is a real shame the runners of this forum allow such dribble spam posts to flood legitimate threads and for those threads to be spammed to death by "attack posts from angry rightist forum trolls".

Such a shame.