So Goldman Sachs has put out a megareport on the issue of American geographic disparity. Dozens of charts looking at the various economic differences between rural, urban, and suburban areas, and between small and medium-sized towns vs. prime cities. A few examples:

Clearly one of the massive advantages of urban areas is its educated workforce. As the report points out: “As the American economy becomes more services- and technology-oriented, the demand for labor has favored workers with high levels of education and specialized skill sets.” So it’s worth highlighting the report’s analysis of education disparities:

Several factors have contributed to the high degree of education disparity between geographies. First, highly-educated professionals earn significantly more in the cities than they do in rural areas, which discourages them from remaining in, or moving to, rural areas. . . . Adults with low levels of education have comparable incomes regardless of geography. As the education level increases, geographical disparity starts to grow, reaching its peak at the graduate and professional degree level. The difference in median income between Rural and Prime areas is about $5000 for people with some college-level education but increases to more than $20,000 for people with a graduate-level education

This stark divergence offers one reason many low-income residents in struggling rural areas have not moved to more prosperous urbanized areas: at the lower end of the education scale, there is very little financial incentive to move. The income disparity at high education levels also explains the difficulties rural areas have in attracting and retaining well-educated workers such as doctors, engineers, and teachers: the financial rewards of working in the cities, along with the urban lifestyle, may be more appealing to many professionals.

Second, due to their small population size, rural areas have significantly fewer colleges and universities — including tax-funded community colleges and state universities — than urban areas, prompting many rural youths to move away in pursuit of a post-secondary education, which in turn often lead to careers in the cities. Relatively fewer of the youths who remain in rural areas attend college, resulting in significant differences in post-secondary enrollment between rural and urban youths. According to data from the American Community Survey, the enrollment rate among college-age population (18-24) in Rural areas is 27%, considerably lower than in other geographical areas, which are all above 40%. This is an indication of the brain drain in Rural counties that will have a long-term impact on their economic competitiveness.

Third, rural economies have a high concentration of sectors such as farming, manufacturing, and retail that ordinarily do not require a highly-educated labor force. As a result, workers may not face the same level of pressure to obtain advanced degrees in order to remain competitive in the labor market, as they do in urban areas. But, this is changing, especially in manufacturing as more complex systems are adopted. The lack of an educated workforce makes it especially challenging for rural communities to transition from a low value-add industry mix to a technology-intensive, knowledge-based economy.