Second point in bold: Who do you think makes up the citizens of this country? I agree that we have too many teet suckers and morbidly obese people, but former vets, boy scouts, general 'farm boys', and those who would defect in the case of government instability would be more than a handful. There's more than the conventional way to win a battle, attrition comes to mind. If we don't drop nukes on foreign enemies in the modern age, why would a government do it to it's own constituents? Not to mention, this is not an academic opinion (as you keep holding a certain poster to, which I agree with), so please do not state it as such. A qualifier could have been "in my opinion" or "it could be argued".
Last point in bold: The first sentence can describe capitalism, so I guess we would have that mindset here in America and apply it elsewhere. It has been a highly successful model for the Nation. The second sentence is just another opinion. In my opinion, your 'city slicker' is showing, so maybe you shouldn't speak up for our neighbors who don't live where you do.
Correct in that the whole of what you quoted is opinion. The qualifiers were the use of the term "assessments" and phrase "it seems" that began the top portion of that post and extended to everything above the double lines.
The second point in bold, the opinion expressed there, is bolstered by the fact that there is a decline in the population of rural America, and an increase in most urban areas. This is an ongoing trend. Rural flight is well documented.
The United States Agricultural Department (USDA) has more information including an easy to understand graph. [link]
The WSJ offers a more nuanced narrative but all roads still seem to lead to metro areas. [link]
Carsey Institute based in UNH Durham offers a contrasting picture based on metropolitan and nonmetropolitan areas (not the same as urban vs rural) indicating the trend of out-migration from nonmetropolitan areas reversed in the 1970s but if we take a look at the graph they offer it puts it into perspective: the nonmetro areas are outmatched (population wise) by the metro ones.
(I also wonder if they accounted for those who moved into non-metropolitan areas 10-20 years ago, have since not moved, but have since been annexed or absorbed into a neighboring city's metropolitan area.)
Historically, rural places have lost population. However,since the rural rebound of the 1970s, the story of migration into and out of rural areas has become more complex.
For much of the 20thcentury, most rural communities experienced population loss as millions of rural residents left for the opportunities in booming cities. The volume of out-migration varied from decade to decade, but the direction of the flows did not. More people consistently left rural areas than came to them.
This trend ended in the 1970s when rural population gains exceeded those in urban areas. Gains in rural areas waned in the 1980s, rebounded in the early 1990sand slowed again in the later 1990s. Rural growth picked up again after 2001, although recent gains remain smaller than in the early 1990s. Currently, 17 percent of the population (50million people) and 75 percent of the land area of the United States is nonmetropolitan.
Carsey Institute - Reports on Rural America
According to the USDA National Resource Conservation Service, currently in Ohio about 3/4s of the population is urban while a little more than 1/4th (26%) is rural. [link] (You probably think those are fair odds.) q:
To better explore this topic of rural vs urban, there is an ongoing discussion (Red vs Blue is really Urban vs Rural values: Exploring the political divisions in America) on this other thread.
As for the last point in bold: "The appetite for the frontier mindset is spoiled by the fact that some profit as others suffer." That is capitalism but we are a mixed-economy in all honesty and the temperament of the profit motive, through regulatory measures, is clearly in demand as indicated by the polls and surveys where the majority of our citizenry and the member body of the NRA favors universal background checks (all sources have been adequately added in this very thread to corroborate that claim).
As for the final portion of the last point: "The spirit of self reliance and roughing it out has been mythicized but serves no real application in our postmodern era."
It is also opinion but more based on our neighbors, disgruntled urbanites who claim they will take to the country in an armed rebellion, that is all it was speaking to.
It was a gross generalization that did ignore your neighbors, which you would be better assessing, so thank you for pointing that out. Rural folks are still severely outnumbered, again you probably find those even odds since the assumption would be that we are lazy while you guys are not. Take note, we are cycling, running, jogging, zumba-ing, and taking to the outdoors in ever increasing numbers...we love our urban bike and hike trails here!
Thank you for strictly discussing the topic with me and allowing me a chance to clarify. For trivia's sake your opinion on whether the rural pop can actually outmatch us city folks on the field is appreciated but hopefully you are not advocating the irrational view of secession. Opinion, I know...
Edited by Leave Britney alone!, 06 May 2013 - 10:07 PM.