[kasey_junk]

“I asked why and was told that by the 1950s it was clear that the national economy had re-centered away from agriculture and small farm towns to a handful of big cities.”

You were told wrong by more than 30 years. The US was officially more urban than rural by the 1920 census but the demographic trend had been going on for 50 years before that.

By 1900 1 in 10 Americans lived in just 5 cities (NYC, Chicago, Philly, St Louis & Boston).

[giantg2]

They aren't wrong, and neither are you. Population growth was large in the cities due to immigration. And if you had many children on a farm, you couldn't divide the land for the next generation and still be profitable, so they had to move to cities. What happened from the 50s-80s were small farms being given up because they weren't economical.

The machinery during the 50s-60s eliminated a lot of agricultural jobs, and drive down prices. Not just for farmers, but also in processing agricultural products.

[rayiner]

Note that, the census considers many “small farm towns” to be “urban areas.” For example, Sibley, Iowa, where my wife grew up. It qualifies because it’s population is 3,000 people (over the 2,500 limit the census bureau uses). But it’s not what most people would consider to be an “urban area.”

[ghaff]

I own a number of acres. One neighbor has an orchard and a horse pasture. Another has a Christmas tree farm. We're adjacent to a fairly large conservation property. We're urban according to the US Census. And we certainly have no practical way to shop by either walking or public transportation.

[bombcar]

The census basically calls it urban if you have a sewer not a septic heh.

Most people consider “small town” to be rural though it’s technically not as it’s a city.

[ghaff]

I don’t even have sewer. Though I do have town water.

[bombcar]

Knew someone who had city sewer but was on a well. Caused an interesting billing problem for the city, since they usually bill for sewer as part of water.