The Future of Coal Country

Post by kefka_p » Wed, Jun 28, 2017, 5:58 PM UTC

rfrank wrote: post #53

thwarted wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While true, this is largely beside the point, and is addressable because it's mostly caused by politics. We don't need to have yet another discussion about Bay Area building constraints. Additionally, there are other cities that have more opportunity than closed mining towns do. At the bare minimum the people need to relocate to someplace marginally better with ANY economic opportunity, because where they're at now h…

No, it's not beside the point, and it's actually a huge portion of the point. Those same constraints exist in the majority of major cities in America. For people on the low end of the earning spectrum, the lack of tangible benefits for moving outside of a vague promise of better job prospects makes staying put a viable option. If you worked at McDonalds, would you move across the country and away from your entire soc…

Post by kefka_p » Wed, Jun 28, 2017, 6:20 PM UTC

rfrank wrote: post #82

kefka_p wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As somebody who has been on both relatively low and high ends of the earning spectrum, I'd say that the vague promise of a better job is far better than some of the alternatives. Very little is stopping these people who live minutes away from the "Paris of Appalachia" from pursuing education and improving their chances elsewhere in a manner they couldn't reproduce even in the presence of their "entire social support"…

What's stopping them from pursuing online education or skills training in their current location? That's what I did when I supported myself at a minimum wage canvassing job that really sucked. Why are they only worth helping if they live in cities? > "entire social support" systems, which I might add seem to be coming up short in the first place. I doubt very much you'd make the same statement about the urban poor.

Post by kefka_p » Wed, Jun 28, 2017, 7:13 PM UTC

rfrank wrote: post #84

kefka_p wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That's what I did when I supported myself at a minimum wage canvassing job that really sucked. Good on you, mate. I've had similar experiences myself. > Why are they only worth helping if they live in cities? Whoa, whoa, whoa. That's reading a bit much into what I'd said. I don't think I said anything that could even remotely merit such an interpretation. There is, of course, a spatial proximity of learning centers…

> What's stopping them from pursuing online education or skills training in their current location?

Post by gozur88 » Wed, Jun 28, 2017, 8:28 PM UTC

opportune wrote: post #7

philipkglass wrote: post #2

Shutting the mine could eliminate more than seven thousand jobs, in a county of thirty-seven thousand people. “Greene County will become a ghost town,” the neighbor wrote. Isn't that the normal fate of towns built around resource extraction after the resource is economically exhausted? The American West is littered with ghost town remnants around depleted mines. It doesn't make much more sense to stay in a coal minin…

I'm originally from an area not in coal country, but right by it and heavily influenced by it. I couldn't agree with you more. Both my home state and the federal government are already essentially subsidizing these people to live in these communities simply because it's where they were born. There is no infrastructure for jobs because there are no industries other than coal and growing marijuana / making moonshine (a…

Post by themacguffinman » Wed, Jun 28, 2017, 11:23 PM UTC

cmurf wrote: post #55

rayiner wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Shaming is an important part of society. It's how we incentivize positive behaviors and discourage negative ones.

Like slut shaming, gay bashing, nerd bullying? Or maybe you'd like to better qualify or narrow your assertion? Because multiple generations did this, for exactly the reasons you state: it was good for society.