4 ms·
Is there some benefit to greater America from their existence? Are you asking if there's a good reason why these small towns should exist?
by ryanmarsh 8y ago
Is there some benefit to greater America from their existence?
Are you asking if there's a good reason why these small towns should exist?
- madengr 8y agoMaybe rural america (energy, food) do Master Blaster style embargo on big cities.
- troygoode 8y agoYou’re assuming rural Americans actually own the food and energy they produce.
- eropple 8y ago"Rural Americans" own neither the energy nor the food production located near them. By and large, rural America is subsidized by the rest of America, be they urbanites or large companies. And to be frank, that's fine; I support generally allowing people to find the best way for them to live, within reason. (Where people like me start getting snippy--and we do, we aren't saints--is when that's not acknowledged. "Real Americans" and the like.)
- Rapzid 8y agoThe Rest of America
- nine_k 8y agoOr, maybe, rather, should small towns be additionally supported. Say, there are benefits for the whole nation (and the whole humankind) from maintaining and supporting national parks and national monuments, even if they don't and can't turn a profit. Or, there are various considerations leading to support for local farming, even if it would not make business sense without donations. Are small towns equally important, and require some degree of support, or should they naturally close shop and disappear sometimes, when they stop making sense, the way businesses do?
- davidw 8y ago> rather, should small towns be additionally supported. This is the key question. No one wants to up and remove those towns. The question is: should we subsidize their existence beyond the infrastructure like road, mail, etc... that we already pay for? And if we want to do that, how do we go about it to get the most bang for our buck?
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]