4 ms·
We have plenty of poor folks in our urban areas. Given the vast resistance (see, eg, Trump) from the rural areas for chipping in for necessary urban infra such
by x0x0 7y ago
We have plenty of poor folks in our urban areas. Given the vast resistance (see, eg, Trump) from the rural areas for chipping in for necessary urban infra such as public transit, I see no reason to vote for continuing to subsidize necessary rural infra: electricity, water, communications. Let them pay market rate.
- bsagdiyev 7y agoThen you have to be willing to pay the increased costs of the products produced by their farms, etc.
- x0x0 7y agoOur current food supply is dominated by industrial farms and imports. Neither of these are likely to be affected. But also, of course -- that's what market prices are for. There are already farms near suburbs that participate in pooled infra sharing costs. Over time, farms will move to areas with less infra costs (ie closer to population centers).
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- elil17 7y agoThe market rate for utility type services is not a fair rate because utilities breed natural monopolies. That’s why the universal service program exists in the first place.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- x0x0 7y agoNo, universal service funds are a subsidy. Rural utilities generally cannot be supplied at a cost people are willing to pay.