[lit-ideas] Re: Inner Moral :Law

  • From: JimKandJulieB@xxxxxxx
  • To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2005 05:34:54 EDT

<<I wonder if size  is the relevant variable here and how this town of  
70,000 supports  itself. >> 


It's largely a University town; during the summer there is a very  noticeable 
change in the population -- profs & students alike amscray.   The second 
largest groups are lawyers, physicians, hospital staff, and insurance  
companies;  
they are largely well-heeld.  In surrounding areas, there  are agricultural 
populations of farmers raising corn and cows; they fight and  scrape for every 
gallon of gas and every carton of milk.  The city has, in  the last 5 years, 
exploded in growth of new buildings -- Jim and I keep  wondering who in the 
world is coming here from where and why.......the divide  between classes is 
growing rapidly.  I don't know about the rest of the  U.S., but it is commonly 
discussed that in this area the so-called "middle  class" is disappearing, 
leaving only the wealthy and impoverished.  You  either grow somehow into the 
one or 
fall into the other.  How that happens  is only dimly clear to me.  But I do 
think, from talking w/ relatives  around the States, that it is not a 
Missouri-only issue.  Btw, Missouri is  getting ready to eliminate Medicaid.  
Right 
now one of the first steps is  that they will no longer reimburse for oxygen.  
Can't breath because of  lung cancer or emphysema??  Don't qualify for Medicare 
or have Private  Insurance?  Too bad.  What do you want on your tombstone?
 
Julie Krueger
not in a good mood

========Original  Message========     Subj: [lit-ideas] Re: Inner Moral :Law  
Date: 8/5/05 4:15:43 A.M. Central Daylight Time  From: _mccreery@xxxxxxxx 
(mailto:mccreery@xxxxxxx)   To: _lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
(mailto:lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx)   Sent on:    

On 2005/08/05, at 17:59, JimKandJulieB@xxxxxxx  wrote:

> I'm in a city of roughly 70,000 pop in mis-Missouri and I  ALWAYS  
> lock my car -- my husband doesn't and he and his daughter  have had  
> 3 cd players ripped out of their vehicles as a  result.  We used to  
> have a very large black mutt dog whom we  took in because his owner,  
> who used him for hunting (he was part  hound, part doby, I think)  
> abandoned him.  He also probably  abused him.  The dog was viciously  
> protective of the  property and I never had to lock my front door.   
> Once we  found the furniture in the foyer upended all over the place  
> and  one piece drug as close to the door as possible.  We believe  
>  someone tried to come in in our absence and the snarling large dog   
> encouraged them to make as quick a get-away as they could.  In  the  
> absence of said dog I would NEVER leave my house unlocked, or  my  
> car.  My husband used to live in a town of 11,000 before  we got  
> married; sort of a modern Mayberry.  He never locked  his house or  
> his truck.  He's adjusting.....and even there,  now, he will lock  
> his office when leaving, which always stood  open.


I wonder if size is the relevant variable here and how this  town of  
70,000 supports itself. My curiosity is driven by the  Goldschmidt  
hypothesis, described as follows at  http://www.sectionz.info/ISSUE_3/ 
Facts_Footnotes.html

> "In the  US, the crucial question was asked more than half a century  
> ago:  what does the growth of largescale, industrial agriculture  
> mean  for rural towns and communities? Walter Goldschmidt's classic  
>  1940s study of California's San Joaquin Valley compared areas  
>  dominated by large corporate farms with those still characterised  
>  by smaller family farms. In farming communities dominated by large   
> corporate farms, Goldschmidt found, nearby towns died off.   
> Mechanisation meant that fewer local people were employed, and   
> absentee ownership meant that farm families themselves were no   
> longer to be found. In these corporate-farm towns, the income   
> earned in agriculture was drained off into larger cities to  support  
> distant enterprises, while in towns surrounded by family  farms, the  
> income circulated among local business establishments,  generating  
> jobs and community prosperity. Where family farms  predominated,  
> there were more local businesses, paved streets and  sidewalks,  
> schools, parks, churches, clubs and newspapers, better  services,  
> higher employment and more civic participation. Studies  conducted  
> since Goldschmidt's original work confirm that his  findings remain  
> true today."
> â Rosset, P. (1999). "Small  is Beautiful." The Ecologist, v.29, i.8  
> (December).
> â  Goldschmidt, W. (1978). "As You Sow: Three Studies in the Social  
>  Consequences of Agribusiness." New Jersey: Allenheld, Osmun and  
>  Company.
>
> "A tremendous amount of attention and research has been  devoted to  
> the impacts of farm scale on rural communities. The  majority of  
> this research follows in the 'Goldschmidt' traditionâ  In addition  
> to generating academic research, concerns over  structural change in  
> U.S. agriculture have also generated public  policiesâ The laws,  
> called anti-corporate farming laws, vary from  state to state but in  
> general are intended to hobble or restrict  corporate involvement in  
> agriculture in order to protect family  farm agricultureâ To test  
> the impacts of the anti-corporate  farming laws we construct two  
> variables: a binary variable for  whether a state has such a law or  
> not; and a restrictiveness  index that allows us to compare states  
> with more restrictive laws  to those with less restrictive laws. In  
> addition, a number of  control variables are included in the  
> analysisâ Rural community  welfare is measured by three variables:  
> percent of families in  poverty, percent unemployed and percentage  
> of farms in a county  realizing cash gainsâ The results of the  
> analysis indicate that,  in general, agriculture dependent counties  
> in states with  anti-corporate farming laws fared better (less  
> families in  poverty, lower unemployment and higher percentages of  
> farms  realizing cash gains) than agriculture dependent counties in  
>  states without such laws."
> â Welsh, R. and T. Lyson (2001).  "Anti-Corporate Farming Laws, the  
> 'Goldschmidt Hypothesis' and  Rural Community Welfare." Friends of  
> the  Constitution.
>
> "The 'diseconomies of scale' extend beyond the  farmgate to  
> affecting the farming community. There is a  substantial body of  
> literature that suggests that large-scale  agricultural production  
> does not bode well for conditions in  farming communities.  
> University of California anthropologist Dean  MacCannell wrote, 'As  
> farm size and absentee ownership increase,  social conditions in the  
> local community deteriorate. We have  found depressed median family  
> incomes, high levels of poverty,  low education levels, social and  
> economic inequality between  ethnic groups, etc... associated with  
> land and capital  concentration in agriculture... Communities that  
> are surrounded  by farms that are larger than can be operated by a  
> family unit  have a bi-modal income distribution, with a few wealthy  
> elites, a  majority of poor laborers, and virtually no middle class.  
> The  absence of a middle class at the community level has a serious  
>  negative effect on both the quality and quantity of social and  
>  commercial service, public education, local governments, etc.'"
> â USDA  National Commission on Small Farms (1998). "A Time to Act."  
>  United States Department of Agriculture, p.19.
> â MacCannell, D. (1983).  "Agribusiness and the Small Community."  
> Background paper to  "Technology, Public Policy and the Changing  
> Structure of American  Agriculture." U.S. Office of Technology  
> Assessment.

Living  in Japan, I know that the situation is not altogether as rosy  
as has  been depicted in tales of wallets returned untouched and there  
is  growing concern that the social contract which supported the  
friendly  habits these stories exemplify is breaking down. Those  
stories are  part of the world of postwar Japan in which annual  
government surveys  regularly revealed that 90% or more Japanese  
regarded themselves as  middle-class and income distribution was  
relatively flat. Now we see  corporate restructuring, the emergence of  
a winner-take-all economy,  and with it a growing polarization of  
class differences. As people  cease to see themselves as part of a  
society in which both benefits  and obligations are shared, hanging on  
to the wallet or its contents  becomes increasingly easy to do. Sales  
of home security systems are  rising.



John  
McCreery------------------------------------------------------------------
To  change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest  on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html

Other related posts: