5 ms·

I do have to wonder if it wouldn't be simpler to just move state functions, as many as are practical, to the county level. Counties are perfectly capable of be

I do have to wonder if it wouldn't be simpler to just move state functions, as many as are practical, to the county level. Counties are perfectly capable of being 100% in charge of their own schools, roads, police. They largely are, but subject to a great deal of probably unnecessary state control.

pii 5y ago
I think we might end up with counties mandating the teaching of some pretty abhorrent things if we did that
- jdminhbg 5y ago
  School systems are already run at a sub-county level, and depending on your politics you can pick which things being taught are abhorrent.
- devmunchies 5y ago
  I agree. I have to move back to the bay area and am scared to death about what they are teaching children there. We'll probably homeschool. I couldn't imagine how much worse it would be if they had their own school system.
jfengel 5y ago
That sounds to me like it would create a ton of redundancy, as different organizations reimplement nearly-identical policies. And then it creates a ton of uncertainty. A different thread was already complaining about the uncertainty of whether children can inherit debts from their parents, which varies from state to state. Is it really a boon to have it vary county by county? "Simpler" would generally be to centralize what can be centralized. Put all your eggs in one basket, and then make sure it's a really good basket. That's not always the best policy, but if you're looking for the simplest policy, it's usually Don't Repeat Yourself.
- kingsuper20 5y ago
  The natural endgame for that is to place all governmental function at the federal level.
  - jfengel 5y ago
    I'll be honest, I do find it kinda weird that we have 50 different definitions of "murder" in the US, and a lawyer from the next state over is legally forbidden from helping you out if they haven't also studied for your state. And I find it equally weird that each separate state gets to define health care regulations, such that separate companies are required in each different state. Lots of duplicated efforts. There are certainly some functions that are best managed locally, and I suppose there must be some value to the "laboratory of the states" notion (though there are way, way too many variables for any of these experiments to actually be informative). But in general, yeah, there's a bunch of stuff that I'd just as soon see pushed up rather than down. It would save a lot of headaches. There is surely some stuff that could be pushed down, as well.
    - TheAdamAndChe 5y ago
      Well the cultures of the states differ significantly. It makes sense to me that regional variation would reflect in laws. I grew up in southern MO. Arkansas was only about a 40 minute drive away, but I can always tell when I'm there compared to at home. The people dress and look a bit different, the houses look different, it's just a different culture. California and New York are like alien worlds to me. The idea that such different people should live under the same framework seems like a good way to amplify regional tensions.
  - spaetzleesser 5y ago
    It’s a delicate balance that needs to be constantly observed and adjusted. That’s why politics is messy.
- jspaetzel 5y ago
  Tons of redundancy also creates tons of room for fresh ideas, this basically applies the ideas of capitalism to government.
asdff 5y ago
Having things at the county level that are currently state functions will break a lot of cities, like Atlanta, which are divided into several counties and leads to issues when it comes to regional planning or transit. I think that we should instead remove the city government from having undue influence on the wider region. Beverly hills managed to stall the LA county purple line subway extension for nearly 25 years, and now the costs to do work planned several generations of planners ago are enormous.
jspaetzel 5y ago
Welcome to the Libertarian party.
Ericson2314 5y ago
This might make school quality even more unequal. No thanks.

pii 5y ago

I think we might end up with counties mandating the teaching of some pretty abhorrent things if we did that

jdminhbg 5y ago
School systems are already run at a sub-county level, and depending on your politics you can pick which things being taught are abhorrent.
devmunchies 5y ago
I agree. I have to move back to the bay area and am scared to death about what they are teaching children there. We'll probably homeschool. I couldn't imagine how much worse it would be if they had their own school system.

jfengel 5y ago

That sounds to me like it would create a ton of redundancy, as different organizations reimplement nearly-identical policies. And then it creates a ton of uncertainty. A different thread was already complaining about the uncertainty of whether children can inherit debts from their parents, which varies from state to state. Is it really a boon to have it vary county by county? "Simpler" would generally be to centralize what can be centralized. Put all your eggs in one basket, and then make sure it's a really good basket. That's not always the best policy, but if you're looking for the simplest policy, it's usually Don't Repeat Yourself.

kingsuper20 5y ago
The natural endgame for that is to place all governmental function at the federal level.
- jfengel 5y ago
  I'll be honest, I do find it kinda weird that we have 50 different definitions of "murder" in the US, and a lawyer from the next state over is legally forbidden from helping you out if they haven't also studied for your state. And I find it equally weird that each separate state gets to define health care regulations, such that separate companies are required in each different state. Lots of duplicated efforts. There are certainly some functions that are best managed locally, and I suppose there must be some value to the "laboratory of the states" notion (though there are way, way too many variables for any of these experiments to actually be informative). But in general, yeah, there's a bunch of stuff that I'd just as soon see pushed up rather than down. It would save a lot of headaches. There is surely some stuff that could be pushed down, as well.
  - TheAdamAndChe 5y ago
    Well the cultures of the states differ significantly. It makes sense to me that regional variation would reflect in laws. I grew up in southern MO. Arkansas was only about a 40 minute drive away, but I can always tell when I'm there compared to at home. The people dress and look a bit different, the houses look different, it's just a different culture. California and New York are like alien worlds to me. The idea that such different people should live under the same framework seems like a good way to amplify regional tensions.
- spaetzleesser 5y ago
  It’s a delicate balance that needs to be constantly observed and adjusted. That’s why politics is messy.
jspaetzel 5y ago
Tons of redundancy also creates tons of room for fresh ideas, this basically applies the ideas of capitalism to government.

asdff 5y ago

Having things at the county level that are currently state functions will break a lot of cities, like Atlanta, which are divided into several counties and leads to issues when it comes to regional planning or transit. I think that we should instead remove the city government from having undue influence on the wider region. Beverly hills managed to stall the LA county purple line subway extension for nearly 25 years, and now the costs to do work planned several generations of planners ago are enormous.

jspaetzel 5y ago

Welcome to the Libertarian party.

Ericson2314 5y ago

This might make school quality even more unequal. No thanks.