Towards A Good Samaritan World

Monday, December 06, 2004

How economic geography relates to families relates to politics: "The Baby Gap." Very smart article. The best answer I've read yet to Pat Cox's question about why population density is correlated with party affiliations. He answers the question mainly in sociological terms: how to protect children. (Urban white liberals want to disarm urban white minorities; rural voters want censorship and cultural politics.)

But the article depressed me somewhat, because it made me feel like since I'm getting married soon, I'll be exiled to dreary "insulated" suburbia. I disagree with the standard line that suburbia is good for kids: it seems to me it sucks to be a kid where there's no public transportation, like being marooned on a desert island. It makes social control easier. Ugh...

Another explanation of the red-blue/rural-urban divide: land values. If you live in the city, you either pay high rents or you have huge capital assets whose value consists mostly in the underlying land, which, in turn, is valuable because of its urban location. Value is socially created. In rural areas land is cheap, and structures on land are worth what it cost to build them. Value is privately created. This affects people's political philosophies.


Post a Comment

<< Home