Compared to the countryside, cities have higher quality education. Moreover, cities have more jobs because most people tend to work in cities. On the other hand, job opportunities in the countryside are fewer and less diverse, and some of them, especially part time ranch jobs, often require labor work and only allow workers to receive low income.
As a result, many farmers move to cities in search of jobs. For instance, the Industrial Revolution forced many farmers to move to cities because there are more job opportunities, and it caused cities in the US, such as Detroit and LA, to expand in a great amount of size. Consequently, urban areas are better places for people to live because there are higher quality of education and a wider choice for jobs. It is true that some people claim that rural areas are better places to live because they have cleaner air and water since they are far from hustle and bustle.
However, compared to rural areas, urban areas have more convenient public transportation, developed security systems, better medical centers, diverse entertainment, and high quality education and job opportunities. Clearly, living in the city is better than living in the countryside.
Your email address will not be published. Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment. Submit Comment. Submit a Comment Cancel reply Your email address will not be published. Load More With higher population density, city life will offer you greater access to varied interpersonal relationships.
Country life is perhaps more supportive for those in stable interpersonal relationships and healthy family and friend connections. Having access to a wide variety of services and other experts nearby in an urban area means you should really consider embracing becoming a specialist. Living in the city lets you leverage all the masters around you. Of course, hiring them can cost a pretty penny.
I can handle basic handyman activities. My work would presumably be a bit lower quality than that of a pro, too. Instead, I hired the work out to a known contractor with good reviews.
I came around to learn a bit about what he was doing and made an observation here and there to understand it, but generally stayed out of the way. After visiting to do an initial review and identify the materials he would need, he had the work done in an afternoon. Instead of multiple days of hard work on my part with a questionable outcome, I spent a day earning enough money to pay him for his work in the comfort of my own home doing what I specialize in. By having access to educational opportunities to specialize and lots of people to network with, city life can help you quickly advance your career.
You need to be resourceful and able to solve things yourself. As resources are more scarce in a city, they tend to be more costly. The effect is that we learn to live with less. We have a smaller house and less land than we could afford in the country.
It means having to redesign and maintain fewer rooms. Hot water which drives the radiant heat as well is provided by the community we live in from a commercial-grade boiler. Our community just finished installing in-ground, connected LED lighting along all the footpaths to the homes.
That was paid for by our monthly fees, built-up over time. A few years ago, an automated in-ground sprinkler system was installed. After a week or two, I finally remembered to order a new flapper, assuming that was the problem. I replaced it, no dice. It still ran. There was no direct financial incentive for us to fix the problem. I bought a two-dollar gasket that fits around the pipe, making a larger surface area for the flapper to seat against and…boom. And this is coming from someone acutely aware of and sensitive to cost increases!
As another example, I know our attic is poorly insulated. Our community pays the heating bill through our HOA fee. I suggested we could just share the cost, too. Either way, it makes economic sense to do so as a whole community.
Of course, a similar problem occurs with loads of shared resources around a city. Infrastructure is underinvested in and funds are argued over.
But, it does create a problem in a city where we organize like a collective. Rural life is much more independent. The balance between collectivism and independence should be considered when you evaluate city life vs country life. Our local connections change as people leave the city to settle more permanently as they age. Frequently, other couples wanting to have kids will move out of the city in search of more space and better or at least, less expensive schools.
Businesses grow and change hands, sending some connections off to new cities for new opportunities. The primary drivers of your carbon footprint as an individual are energy usage and transportation. Both of these factors are driven higher by rural living. You have to travel much larger distances to get routine tasks done like grocery shopping or visiting a doctor.
Dollar for dollar, you can buy more house in rural areas than urban typically. On the one hand, if at an individual level, you were to replant all felled trees used for heating, and you transported those trees in a low carbon footprint way i. Rural living tends to have more self-reliant, DIY folks. They also tend to follow trends less and have less disposable income.
City dwellers, on the other hand, keep up with the latest and greatest while having more money to spend. That results in greater electronic and fashion waste. While the robot version of humanity may be more environmentally efficient in cities, the real humanity somehow manages to outwit the inherent advantages to urban life all too often.
If the US average household size is 2. The numbers look even worse from a global perspective as the US has a below-average population density. We could hook up a solar array to the grid if we wanted. There are even routine heavy materials and electronic waste removal days. We live on a bike route with great access a Bike Score of 82 at the time of writing. Bike routes run from downtown to other cities. We could make a trek a solid 55 miles on a single bike route, mostly separated from traffic, passing through different neighboring cities.
We have multiple high-speed internet providers to choose from. Our ISP even provides access to its mesh wireless network that blankets the city. It also means we can more easily take a laptop or tablet out on a walk and continue to have internet access for work or fun.
Speaking of connectivity, all the major cell providers have a presence here as they do in most urban environments. It makes it easy to try different technologies as they come about like when LTE was becoming prevalent. Having communication service options lets us be picky and competition yields improvement while keeping cost low. You become just a number, one of many members of the community. There are loads of people already ahead of you wanting to help.
The flip side of this is that, when you can have a direct impact, it can be on a much larger population. You may not develop quite the same one-on-one relationship you would when starting a food pantry in a rural place with a low population, but you could be turning the tide of an entire neighborhood for generations. For better or worse, city living will expose you to more problems in the world—expanding your circle of concern. It makes it harder to wrangle your circle of control as more concerns press in.
Since , her commute has been 2. Many friends and family commute an hour or more from the suburbs into the city. Not to mention the tremendous financial cost to maintaining and replacing a vehicle to keep pace with that commute.
Of course, this issue is greatly reduced once that daily commute for work is gone. That alone can be a big motivation for financial independence, retire early FIRE! Of course, coming from a blog about retiring early and personal finance topics—cost of living is one of the most important differences between city life and country life. The BLS , fortunately, keeps some great data about the cost of living between urban and rural areas.
They may use personal vehicles or taxis on the roads, they may opt for trains to traverse across the outskirts of the city or they may hop into an airplane and go to other cities. There are also paved paths for walking and riding bicycles. On the flip side, villages have the worst transport systems. The main drive way may be well maintained, but other interlocking roads that penetrate through villages and farms are rarely tarmacked.
These roads are impenetrable during the wet seasons when they become muddy. Then, there is better communication in the cities. Most communication companies have all their equipment installed in cities, because of the high population which assures them of good return on their investments.
They rarely install communication transmitters in the villages, which makes the communication network in rural areas very poor. Village folks have to rely on strong communication boosters from the cities, which are rarely reliable. They therefore have to look for areas with network before they can communicate, which makes the whole process tiring and frustrating. In the cities, communication networks are virtually everywhere even in the poorest neighborhoods.
Furthermore, the cities have security. Cities have police patrolling twenty four hours a day. Aside from that, there are CCTV cameras all over the city, which makes it easier to catch criminals and solve crimes. The speed dial also assists in faster response rate from the police force, which is very essential during emergency cases.
Due to low population density in the rural areas, the village folks are exposed to a lot of risks. There are no advanced police forces in the villages, just a few sheriffs with poor equipment, who have to cater to all the people. The fact that the villages have poor communication systems is actually a challenge to the village folks during times of crisis, because they cannot alert the authorities in time.
Moreover, the city has a wide selection of career choices and business opportunities. This is the main reason why most people are abandoning villages in favor of cities.
The city is basically a bubbling hub of commercial activities. There is so much more money in circulation in the cities than in the villages, which increases the prospects of prosperity.
There are many career opportunities for both skilled and unskilled people. Also, the high population in cities is very attractive to businessmen and increases the chances of businesses succeeding. The only viable economic activity with a higher likelihood of succeeding in the villages is farming. However, farming does not work much in their favor since they are just producers. They sell their commodities as raw goods to manufacturers, which does not fetch much in comparison to the big corporations that are raking in billions of dollars from processed foods.
There are also public amenities in the cities. The education system in cities are better with more skilled teachers and excellent facilities. Village schools are usually understaffed, because few teachers are willing to take their skills to the villages. There are also many hospitals and medical facilities throughout the cities with different practitioners, such as surgeons, doctors, nurses and psychiatrists.
0コメント