4 ms·
Because it was/is a good balance. You can take your logic all the way down to a city or all the way up to a nation and delegate or not. Having vastly differen
by nogbit 10y ago
Because it was/is a good balance. You can take your logic all the way down to a city or all the way up to a nation and delegate or not. Having vastly different states from one another gives a citizen of a nation the freedom to easily move to somewhere else where the prospects are better and or where it aligns with your way of life more.
- matthewowen 10y agoSure. But why these states in particular? You don't think it's possible that there might be a better configuration of borders/regions? It seems improbable to me that by chance we landed on the optimal structure as these borders were defined in the years spanning from colonization to the early 20th century.
- maus42 10y agoBut does the state level apparatus provide the best balance today?
- tryitnow 10y agoWhy is it a good balance? All you've done is state that "my idea is good because my idea is good." A better response would be to devolve power to CSA - combined statistical areas. These are geographic units defined by economic interactions (measured in part by commuting distances). See, CSA's make sense because they have a rationale based in recent experience. State boundaries from over a century ago do not.