A while back I showed off the population of New York State in 2010, based on every town’s population. We looked at population density of various towns, and how it’s very dense in a few towns, and very spread out in most of state. Today, let’s look at a map of the developed areas of NY State.
Roughly 10% of the state is urbanized… the rest of state is rural.
So what goes on in the rest of state? About 24% of the state is farmed — lots of cows, corn, alfalfa and hay, but an even bigger portion is essentially wildlands, covered with water or forest lands.
It’s not to say people don’t live in other areas — they do. But small rural houses and farm steads are just footnotes, in a largely wild, forested or farmed landscape that makes up most of New York.
I live and work in an urbanized area. For most of week, I get on a bus or walk from place to place, go to work, go to the library, and otherwise interact with others in an urbanized fashion. People from Albany are pretty urban, by no means is Albany a farm town — although there are certainly many rural areas around Albany.
Yet, despite all the time I spend in Albany, the city really is just a little dot on the map compared to vast lands around it. Drive less then 20 miles in any direction, and chances are you’ll be in a mountain town, a farm town, or some kind of national or state forest.
Albany is a large enough of a metro-area to have a very urban feel to it. It’s cities have all of the regular urban problems, from drugs to gang violence. But your never very far from the rural hinderlands, and truly rural areas that are largely independent from the city’s regular activities.
With the cold weather of the past two months, I’ve spent much too much time in city. But getting back up to Vermont I’ve come to realize all I’ve missed, outside the 2%.
That’s an interesting thought. The United States Senate has two senators for each state, while the US House is propotionally represented. While an urban state like New York State recieves 29 representives, we only get two senators, a rural state like Vermont recieves only 1 representive and 2 senators.
In theory, that would mean a rural state like Vermont, Wyoming, North Dakota, or even Iowa would have have a disproptionate impact on the legislation through the US Senate. While it’s true that such states have more of a voice in the US Senate, it’s not clear rural residents get more representation in the US Senate.
Why not? For one thing, US Senate districts are larger. Much larger, typically covering whole states. The problem is that by representing complete states, every senator represents both urban and rural areas, and in most states, urban populations outnumber rural portions of states.
If any thing, urban consituencies have more power in the US Senate then the US House. There are representives in US House Districts that are predominately rural, in contrast to even rural states, where population is dominated by urban centers — such as Burlington, Vermont.
If you ask many people today, the assumption would be almost everybody has a Bachelors Degree, if not more education then that. Yet, except in the most suburban (and wealthy) portions of state, Bachelors Degrees are relatively uncommon — often held by fewer then 1 in 10 people over 25 years of age.
It turns out there is a close connection between suburban lifestyles and having a bachelors degree. Zoomed into closer into a map of the Capital District, you will note how closely link suburbanization is to number of people with a bachelors degree.
That said, obtaining that Bachelors Degree might be worth your while — if you avoid college debts, and land a good job after college. Indeed, the wealthiest portions of state tend to have the highest percentage of those with Bachelors Degree, e.g. the suburbs.
It’s probably wrong to assume one is wealthy or well off with a Bachelors Degree, or that all rural folks are backwards hicks leaving in poverty. It’s more that the more affluent (in money terms) suburban life tends to require more schooling then more rural or urban occupations.
Rural America and Urban America are both fundamentally different and also directly inter-related. One policy may make sense for one community but directly conflict with the values or virtues of another community. In some cases, one policy will benefit one community at the detriment of another community, but in more times then not the difference is ideological.
We live in an era with low-cost high-speed transportation that makes it easy for most people to intermix between rural and urban areas. Different cultures may not mix or meet due to environmental differences, but there is a constant possibility that urban and rural people, goods, and services will meet. This level of commerce can cause problems. Technology makes it possible to create levels of environmental harm that can move between both environments in the form pollution or nuisance.
Yet, the biggest threat to both of these areas is intolerance and ideology. People have viewpoints based on the environment that they are socialized in, and they tend to be intolerant of those who are different then themselves. People too often know how others should live and conduct their lives, without trying to put themselves in somebody\’s else shoes.
