Since one must register with WaPo to read the entire article - which I have not done - perhaps someone could post further excerpts and graphs. The article is getting some traction and I would like to read all of it. Thanks.
A factually dishonest article, typical of the Wash Compost. The entire county-wide analysis is based on “richness” as defined by GDP contribution of a county. Therefore there is a bias towards urban centers because GDP will be concentrated there since most corporate and govt. headquarters, along with the most retail centers will be found there. This also results in the most employment.
Likewise, most manufacturing processing is in urban centers as well because of the concentration of infrastructure, utilities, transportation, retail centers, etc. However, much of the raw material and agriculture extraction efforts will be in rural counties, but the greatest contribution from these efforts will show up in GDP in the processing centers, which are mostly in the large urban areas. All this leads to a bias in the entire reporting. In fact, I am surprised that there is not a greater disparity in the total GDP numbers. This just shows that small business is still very important in 2/3 of the country, accounting for about 1/3 of total GDP.
Registration is free with access to a limited number of articles per month.
Article makes sense. If the country’s policies are concentrating economic success in smaller and smaller geographical areas, which the article suggests has happened, it only makes sense the rest of the country will rise up against it. The article helps defend the concept of the electoral college in a way, with its focus on geography.