[Location] Urban vs. Rural

Pops · Posted: Sun Mar 02, 2008 2:57 pm Post subject: Re: [Location] Urban vs. Rural

We live in SW Missouri, not exactly a haven of pacifists if the history books and local memory is close to accurate.

And I am not close to native...

But like most any other decisions one must asses the situation relative to what THEY can do and not solely on their guess of what OTHERS will do.

Personally, we already won by running away from CA when we did.
It seems we picked a good location for us in the near term and hopefully our kids and grandkids will have a chance to become somewhat local before really bad things happen.

But the bad things starting to happen due to PO here and there, will probably happen most everywhere eventually.

I think the smart move is to get where YOU can do best.
_________________
Make a plan and work it:

marko · Posted: Fri May 16, 2008 8:30 am Post subject: Re: [Location] Urban vs. Rural

I am looking to buy a piece of property where I hope to spend the rest of my life (maybe another 40 years or so, if I'm lucky).

A friend of mine who accepts peak oil as a reality tried to convince me last night that I would be better off buying a foreclosed house in one of Boston's crime-ridden, gang-plagued slums 4 miles from the center of the city and 2 miles from an upscale central neighborhood than buying a house with an acre of land (good for gardening) in an exurban township (semirural but inhabited by commuters, not farmers) on a commuter-rail line 20 miles from the center of Boston.

His argument was that, as energy prices rise, a more central location will be more desirable, and the slums closest to the city center will be gentrified by upper-middle-class professionals moving in from exurbs who want to be close to work. They will displace the urban underclass and demand better policing, so crime will drop. He also argued that the poor will be forced out to the outer suburbs, like the one that I am considering, and that I will be risking my life in an exurb once the nice middle-class people are replaced by the desperately poor.

My concerns are that the white-collar service sector (Boston's many high-paying jobs in medical research labs, university administration, and finance) will be most vulnerable in the coming economic depression and that in fact many upper middle class suburbanites will be out of work and without an incentive to relocate closer to a nonexistent job. Meanwhile, low-paid work will continue to be available for security guards, truck drivers, nurse's aids, and the like, which will allow the working population of the slums to remain where they are. However, the number of low-paid jobs will also decrease, and more and more young people will want to join violent gangs, which will play a growing role in an urban underground economy. As an obvious white face in a poor, black neighborhood, I would be an obvious target for extortion or worse.

Which of us do you think is right?

Unfortunately, moving to a rural area and growing my own food is not a realistic option for me. I don't begin to have the needed skills. I can't even do a good job of sawing a 2x4 into sections. While I have been growing vegetables in a community garden for a couple of seasons and having decent results, I need an income. My present job in central Boston seems secure through a recession and even into all but the deepest depression. I am reluctant to give it up without a solid alternative plan for making the money I will need to pay for a mortgage, grains and other foods I can't reasonably grow, property taxes, supplies, etc. That means staying within commuting distance of Boston. There are no rural areas within commuting distance of Boston.

I could afford a small house on a large lot along a commuter rail line 20 miles out. I could also afford a foreclosed house without much yard in a slum 4 miles out. I can't afford a condo, let alone a house, in an upscale central neighborhood. I could afford a house and yard in a small town 100 miles away in a rural setting, but then I don't know how I'd make a living.

What do others think? Should I really consider buying property in a slum and hoping that it will become gentrified and safe?

Thanks.

Shannymara · Master Joined: Oct 04, 2004 Posts: 5103 Location: Oklahoma

Pops · Posted: Fri May 16, 2008 10:26 am Post subject: Re: [Location] Urban vs. Rural

I think he may have a good idea, but like Shanny said the gamble is in picking the right neighborhood.

My vote, for what its worth, is for the little house on the big lot along the rail line. Especially if you find one with lots of established homeowners around your age.
_________________
Make a plan and work it:

mos6507 · Fission Joined: Aug 03, 2007 Posts: 2989

turner · Tar Sands Joined: Jun 10, 2008 Posts: 53

I notice that most of the discussions I read suggest that you need to do one thing or another - rural or city - communal or individual. Is there not merit in a gathering a few of your family and/or friends and agreeing to maintain one inner city property and one rural property for the collective use of all. For those that can keep a job, they work in the city, and the others work on the land to produce food. There is the problem of getting to and from but if you are banding together maybe you can afford for individuals to make periodic expensive trips. It's not ideal and it does require collabaration but then we are unlikely to be able to maintain the current single family single accomodation arrangement anyway. Families and friends will no doubt end up supporting each other financially or otherwise when things get tough. Obviously when TSHTF totally you all will relocate to the land.
This is my current plan but still very early in my thought processes on how to approach peak oil mitigation. What do you think?

Wildfire · Posted: Wed Jun 11, 2008 3:41 pm Post subject: Re: [Location] Urban vs. Rural

This is a discussion that is straight out of what my husband and I have been discussing for the last several years!

First thing, I started reading this from the beginning, when this thread started back in 2004. I thought it almost amusing when I read a post from Dustin (posted in 2004) that stated:

" Imagine it was 1998 when oil was 10$ a barrel and it suddenly jumped to 50$, people would have riots, marches on washington, and a sudden cry for fuel efficent cars. However, that rise of 400% was spead over a 6 year period, and sure enough, people accepted the fuel prices and we are still not motivated for fuel efficency. Oil could rise to 100$ a barrel...."

That last part about oil rising to $100 dollars a barrel chokes me up! LOL! But he was definitely right on.

I am thankful the Good Lord has provided my young family with this 34 acres and ancient (but comfortable) farmhouse. I would never live in a city at this point because of where things are headed. I feel God has put me in the ideal position; I'm almost an hour away from a small city in a well populated rural area where there are tons of farmers and hunters; people who raise sheep, goats, chickens, cattle, hogs, horses. I am 9 miles from a little town that was once a thriving mill town. I can easily ride (and have done a number of times) my horses there where there is a local hardware/feed/seed store, a few "restaurants", a Dollar General, etc. I have friends that drive their horses in buggies and wagons and use mules to plow. I spent last year with an old mountain man learning how to hunt deer on my property. (I'm a 35 year old woman.) As for the future, we intend on raising crops, goats (fantastic meat supply and so economical to keep), chickens, a few horses and will probably expect to see the return of the barter system.

If I were someone living in a city, I would definitely start driving out to those little rural towns that are so disparaged by "sophisticated" folks and see what is available. In this current housing market, sells have slumped so badly that a place in the country should be fairly easy to obtain. As for work, if you find a place inexpensively enough, you don't have to make a huge salary.

Even if you have just a few acres you would be able to grow your own food, probably have something to trade for other types of food, and have a wealth of survival knowledge around you in the form of your neighbors. And man you better believe everyone around here carries a gun, and our community would certainly pull together to protect what we have.

JMO

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Coming home from very lonely places, all of us go a little mad: whether from great personal success, or just an all-night drive, we are the sole survivors of a world no one else has ever seen.
- John le Carre[b]

lastchance · Coal Joined: Jun 05, 2006 Posts: 15

xerces · Posted: Sat Jun 14, 2008 9:01 pm Post subject: Re: [Location] Urban vs. Rural

I think I have posted my opinion from earlier but it's worth another try.
Urban and Rural are both viable options, it just applies to different people.

The country side supplies the cities with food and raw materials. The cities supply the countryside with products/technology/culture/services.

For me, NYC is the ideal place to make a stand. This city will always have first priority when it comes to resources and energy due to it's sheer strategic importance as a major center of trade and the financial center of the nation's elites. The place has been extremely good to me in terms of dramatically increasing the wealth and physical resources at my disposal. This is especially at a time when the surrounding regions are experiencing major economic contractions. Another matter is human resources. Large amounts of unskilled, organized, and/or motivated labor can be had for a relatively lower cost here than elsewhere. In the future I think this could be a key differentiator. It is not out of the realm of possibility for there to be a form of plantation agriculture or share-cropping within the next several decades. A huge surplus of willing labor would fill this need.
_________________
http://backtowilderness.blogspot.com
http://grown-up-permaculture.com

allenwrench · Intermediate Crude Joined: Apr 23, 2008 Posts: 719

StevenSlaughter · Coal Joined: Aug 20, 2008 Posts: 11

Having just discovered this site (and PO, actually), I have found reading some posts to this long thread quite interesting.

As a pubic school teacher in Chicago, I find myself in an interesting position. While I wouldn't want to find myself in such a big city if the SHTF in a sudden way, there are some advantages to being here for the time being. As I mentioned in my intro post in the Welcome section a few minutes ago, the Y2K scare woke me up to the fact that I was a person with very little practical, hands-on skills, meaning I could not grow anything, build anything, or fix anything. It got me going, and ever since, like many of you, I suspect, I've been consciously working to learn critical skills. I garden organically and raise hens in my tiny city backyard (yes, its legal in the city limits, though not in most every suburb Smile

. I also work on improving my carpentry skills. Lately, I've been looking into getting better with non-power tools.

Anyway, while the city has a myriad of problems, it isn't a bad place to begin learning skills while making a decent living. There are also endless learning opportunities close at hand. Chicago has been greening steadily and one can find tons of groups and classes in every conceivable area of useful endeavor. (Tomorrow, I have two offers from beekeepers within biking distance to come and assist and learn from them.) Also, being a teacher allows for summers to work on all of this, as well as providing an opportunity to teach kids about it. (More on this in a new topic I plan to start.)

As for urban vs. rural, and especially the rate of transition-decline-crash question, at this point, I tend to subscribe to the steady decline over the sudden collapse theory. I concede that this may just be wishful thinking given that I really don't want to leave the city yet. Beyond that, though, I tend to think that the future most of us are envisioning is so far beyond the average person's conception that they will see all but the most disastrous circumstances as: 1) temporary, and 2) fixable by the govt. This will keep them here, even if things get tough. What option will they really have.

As things get worse, those who feel it first, as JH Kunstler predicted years ago, will be the outer ring suburban sprawl dwellers. Already, it is becoming incredibly expensive to commute from so far away. On the other hand, many of these people also have enormous lawns. Before long, I expect to see an ever-increasing return to the Victory Garden movement, and in this regard, we will join the way much of the rest of the urban world has continued to live, in which more food than westerners would believe is still raised in tiny city gardens.

As for long-term and more doomsday scenarios, the rate of decline is really going to shape so much of this, I think. A city can go up in flames during a disaster (New Orleans, LA riots, etc.), but it can also evolve in wonderful ways if given increasing awareness, necessity, and time. As for me, I envision living in a smaller town somewhere in the midwest.

Anyway, its good to be here and I just wanted to chime in.

Warm Regards,

Steven Slaughter
Chicago

Pops · Posted: Wed Aug 20, 2008 4:02 pm Post subject: Re: [Location] Urban vs. Rural

Thanks Steven, the more ideas the better - especially from one able to influence what our kids are taught.
_________________
Make a plan and work it: