pete75 wrote:Cunobelin wrote:Ron wrote:A popular argument, but for many present rural dwellers, if they had not had a car in the first place, or been unable to drive for any reason they would never have moved to a rural location.
The opposite is actually the real problem.
Many rural communities are having problems because people are being either forced or choose to move away.
These are not people who have moved there, rather those who have been there for all there lives, and often second or third generation.
I don't think that diagram is quite correct. It's investment not lack of it that has reduced job opportunities in rural areas.
Investment in large, expensive farm machinery has taken jobs away. Take a friends farm for example. Not a big farm just 550 acres. Late seventies there were nine people working on it including him and his father. By the year 2000 it was just him alone and a couple of students taken on to cart corn in harvest.
Main employment in rural areas was in agriculture, forestry and quarrying/mining. Go back fifty years around here and all three employed quite a few people. There were nine people employed in woods local to this village. The Forestry Commision actually built nine houses for them to live in . Five miles away there was another group of six forestry commission houses. Several other villages have FC houses dotted around. The later ones are easy to recognise because they're built from wood. The earlier look like good quality fifties council houses. There's now a part time forester covering all the local woods. When there's any clearance there's a couple of blokes with a big Valmet tree harvester and a tractor and log trailer.
The ironstone quarries and mine closed down altogether 40 years ago.
So farming jobs vastly reduced through investment in machinery and ditto for forestry jobs. Iron ore quarries and mine closed due to steel making investment in other countries.
I'm not sure it is that simple. The decline in rural populations has been happening for at least 150 years. Likewise, the decline in numbers of people working in farming and agriculture. How much is mechanisation and automation a cause, and how much is it a response to global trade? Global trade having adverse effects is not a new problem. It was happening in 1880.
But mechanisation and automation has also cut the numbers of people working in many areas, not just farming. Yet large cities have seen other jobs created to take their places. Rural areas, for some reason, do not benefit from these new jobs.This is not a uniquely English problem. You see the same throughout the world. The quality of life is much better in a small town, or village, or country side, yet people move to larger towns and cities. Those with skills, education, training, have opportunities that do not exist in their home area. (And those at the bottom are often worse off, but there is always a dream of gold paved streets - just around the next corner).
When people move away, or others do not move in, then you end up with all sorts of social problems.