On Tue, 13 Jan 2009 08:33:13 +0000, Peter Scott wrote:

cities were always parasitic on the countryside until a brief period in
industrial times when they actually manufactured something useful.

Now they are more or less open prisons for the uncivilised.

Oh at last! Someone who has a knowledge of history and is prepared to
look at evidence. Thank you Nat for your contribution.

Quite agree, look back through history. Cities do not develop until
agriculture is productive enough to release people from food production to
do other things. If the countryside becomes unproductive, say due to a few
years drought, any cities supported by that countryside collapse as they
have no support and cannot support themselves.

This has not changed, but it appears that many people do not realise it.
Probably due to the global supply chains we have now and the false premise
that if one food source fails there are plenty of others to buy from. This
is not the case. When food becomes scarce the exporting countries will
feed their own populace first and export second. As was highlighted last
year.

The relationship between cities and countryside is a symbiosis but out of
cities or countryside the one that starts and ends any period with cities
is the countryside.

--
Cheers
Dave.