!5 Minute Cities not 15 mile.
https://www.dw.com/en/15-minute-cities-what-are-they-and-how-do-they-work/a-64907776

Its more like 6% if you include exurban type of settlement, but yes, a small percentage of the CONUS. Add in Alaska, and well the number would go to maybe around the 3% you all are quoting (AK is 20% the size of the CONUS).

What is truly interesting is that 80% of the U.S. population lives in what is defined as a "metropolitan" county. A "metro" county either has an urban place of 50,000 or more people or is attached (next county, 2nd county) to a much larger urban place.

Another 10% of Americans live in "micropolitan" counties. They are defined as county with an urban place of 25,000 but less than 50,000.

So, in the end, 10% of the population lives on about 90% (or more) of the rest of the land.

The leading land covers in the CONUS are grassland/shrublands (some mapping efforts separate the two, others combine them) at about 40%, forests at just under 30% (I think the figure we came up with was 27%), and cropland at about 18%. Developed, water, and wetlands are all around 5% each. Barren a percent and snow/ice (this doesn't count AK), only a fraction of 1%.

Might be , just going on what I've seen with my own eyes over the last 50-60 years .
From wide open farm land to transplants from the cities.
Less and less freedom because property becomes more important than neighbors.
Less and less crops being planted.
Very seldom see a garden on the new home sites.
Dairy farms from almost every where , to maybe 1 in 25-30 square miles.
Seem farms go under because of Farmers Home Administration , loaning way above what the land could produce.
Pushing more loans cheap , until the farmer couldn't pay any more , and farms going under.
The land becoming small plots that by design couldn't support life.
3-5 Acres , wont support a family, let alone but a small few meat animals.
Yet that's the way it's set up.

We get over 6 times as much corn per acre as we did pre 1950. Other crops are more productive too. US agricultural production has actually far outpaced the US population growth.

Keith

can you say covid? how many did it kill worldwide?

Wolverine if done correctly and in the right location 3 to 5 acres could support a family. Depending on what you mean as support feeding the family and ot amount of income from the land. We have 96acres but could do all we are doing on that amount. We grow 70% of our food and supply 8 families with weekly delivery of produce, sell eggs and meat chickens and rabbits. I have over 20 bee hives but not all are on my farm. A family can easily feed its self and make money on small pieces of land. Especially if they direct market and development the markets. Being near an urban center makes that more profitable marketing to the organic. Locally grown urbanites with money.

Now the population is concerned about GMO's !
While it's true that we get more production , is it really good production?
Have you grown a garden that you wonder why it doesn't produce like it did 30 years ago?
Unless you use chemicals to stop insects , moldy mildew , or some blight , that weren't 30 years ago?
Seems you can only plant what you're told to .
Don't you dare save seeds , it's a crime.
I just find it overbearing , that we're more and more controlled by those that pull the strings.
Government controlled farms , government controlled seed production, and new crop problems every few years.
JMHO !

Kameltoe?

The one who got to the white house on her knees.

He knows who it is. Even he isn't that dumb.

Commie Harris. Dumbest VP to ever draw a breath.

Absolute Hypocrisy!!! The Population is too high here in the USA then WHY are they opening the Borders and bringing in Millions!!!??? Sounds more like a BC statement!!!

She's talking about reducing the American population. There is a current movement to replace Americans with illegals. The people in power now are dictators. Dictators are dangerous if you have ever studied history, but we don't teach history anymore so this current group of educated idiots don't know. Keep voting Democrat it's easier than getting a job!

I can see both sides to the population issue.

More people means more ideas and minds to draw from, never know when the next Edison or Einstein will be born. They are so rare that the more people the more chances of one coming along.

Less people means less use of resources and lets face it unless one lives like a caveman we all are taking more than we are giving back, how long can that go on/?

Myself I'd like to see less people, currently a large chunk of humanity, especially in the west is not living any where close to its capabilities. lets maximize what we have before we add more would be a better solution.

A different thought I had is that explains the liberal need for abortion.

Of course there are too many people. Why in the heck would anyone argue that more people is good?

Nature and/or human nature will take care of it at some point.

Most government Ponzi schemes need an increasing number of people. The same people that want the population to decline, need the population to increase to fund their Ponzi schemes. Catch 22. When democrats start supporting bills that remove government financial incentives for having children, then you will know they are serious about reducing the U.S. population.

"So, what proposals are on offer from pundits and politicians? A sampling of a few of the biggest proposals I’ve encountered advertising themselves as pro-family should give a sense of the upper limit of what U.S. policymakers are considering. None of these policies advertise themselves as attempting to boost fertility, but they are all structured in such a way as to reward childbearing, and thus plausibly increase fertility. Congressman Ro Khanna (D-CA) proposes a huge increase of the EITC to support working families. Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) would like to expand the child tax credit and make it refundable against payroll taxes. Congresswoman Rosa De Lauro would also like to expand the child tax credit, adding a second credit paid out monthly to families for kids under age 6. The Center for American Progress proposes a monthly refundable credit, but only for kids under age 3. Finally, researchers at UW-Madison have suggested a monthly child allowance paid directly to families. Some of these proposals have other components as well, either removing some existing supports or restructuring those programs. But for my purposes, I want to make a rough model of what impact implementing these policies might have if we didn’t make any other changes."

Source: Institute for family studies

True , as I said small meat animals.
You would need to buy feed for larger meat animals.
5 Acres doesn't give you a lot of room for growing hay and grains, especially with a pasture.

NOT NEARLY ENOUGH... IN THE RIGHT PLACES!!!!

Garry-

Well I have 96 acres and still buy 150 to 200 bales of hay along with some feed. We only have between 8 and 15 goats. The goats pay for their own keep and even make a small profit. I could probably get by feeding less or none but prefer the convenience of having the does in milk in or near the barn for easy milking. Also ther milk tast better and consistent when feed hay vs browsing who knows what. Like a cows milk if it's put out on fresh spring grass with lots of onion Gras the milk will have a garlic after taste vs a hay dust after tast if feed hay. Of course that of its consumed raw not processed.

I misunderstood your making a living off small acres to mean profitable income not self sufficient and producing all your own feed.
No farm is self-sufficient some are more then others but all buy off farm inputs. So when I heard make a living I automatically went to feeding the family and making a profit off the farm. Currently I would be money ahead if I were going by that criteria on small acreage of 5 to 10 vs the 96. I would have more in the bank not buying so much land, I would have much less expense in upkeep and need less and could get by with smaller equipment and I would have a lot more time not keeping up with so much land. I could spend more time and have a smaller area operating much more efficiently.

I think many people drastically underestimate what can be done on even just a single acre.

That said economics has litle to do with me wanting even more land. I can expand and the prices just keep climbing. Since my off farm job supports my aspiring farm business I spend 4 times what the farm has made last year just working on building infrastructure and developing markets. Im also always shooting myself in the foot ( like looking at a 20month old jersey that's supposed to be 6 months breed today on line) I'm not ready for it at all but my wife has wanted a jersey milk cow for several years and I'm thinking about surprising her with it. The cow is currently a want not a need and an expensive want with on going expenses. It can pay for its self I'm sure if it calfs with no complications. Especially if like most farmers you don't put a price on your time or severely under value your time.