5 ms·

It's my understanding that relatively few people live out in the boondocks. Is that an incorrect understanding? In a democratic system, how could such a small p

It's my understanding that relatively few people live out in the boondocks. Is that an incorrect understanding? In a democratic system, how could such a small population be at fault for preventing infrastructure spending in population centers?

murgindrag 6y ago
Electoral college. Boondock states get two senators each. Urban states get two senators each. California's 40 million people have the same representation in the senate as Wyoming's 580 thousand people.
- mitch3x3 6y ago
  Thats true for the senate, but that’s why there is another branch that has proportionate representation. Both of them have important individual roles that the other branch would/could not do, due to political barriers.
- trynumber9 6y ago
  The Senate is required to approve city's road maintenance expenditures? I thought the US was more decentralized than that.
  - murgindrag 6y ago
    A lot of the discussion is about federal taxes and subsidies. The federal government funds a lot of local stuff too. It maintains a lot of control over cities and states through funding. For example, if your roads and schools don't meet federal standards, that's okay, but you're not getting federal funding. Everyone opts for federal funding.
  - daniellarusso 6y ago
    This is what keeps the federal government and federal politicians so powerful, most areas need federal funds to keep up with these expenses.
    - xyzzyz 6y ago
      This is simply untrue, and it's enough to look at budgets of most places to see that.
      - jcrawfordor 6y ago
        Various reports show that the federal government picks up about a third of the tab for infrastructure spending, although it varies widely by state and type of infrastructure. This seems quite significant.
        xyzzyz 6y ago
        Federal government is typically shelling out money for things like interstates, major bridges and major water works. They give practically nothing for local roads and sewers. Additionally, federal government money comes from the people's income taxes anyway, and if federal government didn't tax people so much, the state and local government could tax them more instead, to cover bigger share of the costs.
        jcrawfordor 6y ago
        The big issue I see here is that where I live, and I think in many more rural areas, federal infrastructure constitutes a significant portion of the total infrastructure. A generous portion of the major city streets, for example, are US highways, and flood control was almost entirely built federally (and maintenance must now be funded by the local flood control district). This no doubt varies by region, but the portion of infrastructure which is federally funded is not small.
        daniellarusso 6y ago
        “ if federal government didn't tax people so much, the state and local government could tax them more instead, to cover bigger share of the costs.” I upvoted you and agree. This is exactly my point, the power is at the federal level, and the state and municipalities rely on funds from ‘above’. Here are some EPA federal grants for municipal water systems: https://www.epa.gov/ground-water-and-drinking-water/drinking-water-grants https://www.epa.gov/ground-water-and-drinking-water/drinking... Sewer overflow grant: https://www.epa.gov/cwsrf/sewer-overflow-and-stormwater-reuse-municipal-grants-program https://www.epa.gov/cwsrf/sewer-overflow-and-stormwater-reus... I Googled “epa muni water grants”.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
mitch3x3 6y ago
Rural/suburban folks tend to own homes, and property owners vote more than renters do.
- throwaway0a5e 6y ago
  Considering how much more locked in the are it makes sense. The stakes are higher for them.
- zzapplezz 6y ago
  They also tend to move less and stay in the same district for a large percentage of their lives. It's a lot easier to vote if you only need to sign up once and the same process applies. If you're young and mobile, you're changing cities/counties/states and therefore less likely to keep up with the different races.
ebg13 6y ago
> It's my understanding that relatively few people live out in the boondocks. Is that an incorrect understanding? The majority of Americans live in suburbs. The majority of counties are rural. https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2018/05/22/demographic-and-economic-trends-in-urban-suburban-and-rural-communities/ https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2018/05/22/demographic-and-e...

murgindrag 6y ago

Electoral college. Boondock states get two senators each. Urban states get two senators each. California's 40 million people have the same representation in the senate as Wyoming's 580 thousand people.

mitch3x3 6y ago
Thats true for the senate, but that’s why there is another branch that has proportionate representation. Both of them have important individual roles that the other branch would/could not do, due to political barriers.
trynumber9 6y ago
The Senate is required to approve city's road maintenance expenditures? I thought the US was more decentralized than that.
- murgindrag 6y ago
  A lot of the discussion is about federal taxes and subsidies. The federal government funds a lot of local stuff too. It maintains a lot of control over cities and states through funding. For example, if your roads and schools don't meet federal standards, that's okay, but you're not getting federal funding. Everyone opts for federal funding.
- daniellarusso 6y ago
  This is what keeps the federal government and federal politicians so powerful, most areas need federal funds to keep up with these expenses.
  - xyzzyz 6y ago
    This is simply untrue, and it's enough to look at budgets of most places to see that.
    - jcrawfordor 6y ago
      Various reports show that the federal government picks up about a third of the tab for infrastructure spending, although it varies widely by state and type of infrastructure. This seems quite significant.
      - xyzzyz 6y ago
        Federal government is typically shelling out money for things like interstates, major bridges and major water works. They give practically nothing for local roads and sewers. Additionally, federal government money comes from the people's income taxes anyway, and if federal government didn't tax people so much, the state and local government could tax them more instead, to cover bigger share of the costs.
        jcrawfordor 6y ago
        The big issue I see here is that where I live, and I think in many more rural areas, federal infrastructure constitutes a significant portion of the total infrastructure. A generous portion of the major city streets, for example, are US highways, and flood control was almost entirely built federally (and maintenance must now be funded by the local flood control district). This no doubt varies by region, but the portion of infrastructure which is federally funded is not small.
        daniellarusso 6y ago
        “ if federal government didn't tax people so much, the state and local government could tax them more instead, to cover bigger share of the costs.” I upvoted you and agree. This is exactly my point, the power is at the federal level, and the state and municipalities rely on funds from ‘above’. Here are some EPA federal grants for municipal water systems: https://www.epa.gov/ground-water-and-drinking-water/drinking-water-grants https://www.epa.gov/ground-water-and-drinking-water/drinking... Sewer overflow grant: https://www.epa.gov/cwsrf/sewer-overflow-and-stormwater-reuse-municipal-grants-program https://www.epa.gov/cwsrf/sewer-overflow-and-stormwater-reus... I Googled “epa muni water grants”.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

mitch3x3 6y ago

Rural/suburban folks tend to own homes, and property owners vote more than renters do.

throwaway0a5e 6y ago
Considering how much more locked in the are it makes sense. The stakes are higher for them.
zzapplezz 6y ago
They also tend to move less and stay in the same district for a large percentage of their lives. It's a lot easier to vote if you only need to sign up once and the same process applies. If you're young and mobile, you're changing cities/counties/states and therefore less likely to keep up with the different races.

ebg13 6y ago

> It's my understanding that relatively few people live out in the boondocks. Is that an incorrect understanding? The majority of Americans live in suburbs. The majority of counties are rural. https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2018/05/22/demographic-and-economic-trends-in-urban-suburban-and-rural-communities/ https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2018/05/22/demographic-and-e...