3 ms·
On the other hand, if a state has the bottom rank in GDP, wouldn't we want to provide infrastructure to lift them up? Saying "They're already poor, let's not i
by analognoise 5y ago
On the other hand, if a state has the bottom rank in GDP, wouldn't we want to provide infrastructure to lift them up?
Saying "They're already poor, let's not invest in their infrastructure" sounds like a self-fulfilling prophecy to me - they'll stay poor unless we invest in them?
- AnthonyMouse 5y agoStates typically have the bottom rank in GDP because they're mostly empty. The big industries in Arkansas are agriculture, forestry and mining. Their agriculture industry isn't fundamentally different than agriculture in some other state, it just so happens that New York also has a major finance industry etc. There is nothing wrong with this. There is no requirement that every state have an equal share of the finance industry etc. But then the Senators from New York represent the finance industry and the Senators from Arkansas represent the forestry industry. So the Senators from New York make sure that nobody is ever allowed to disintermediate Visa and MasterCard and the Senators from Arkansas get big federal money for a lock and dam system. Both of these are simple corruption.
- ethbr0 5y agoThere are exceptions, like the TVA. No one would have built hydroelectric and electrified Appalachia, because why would you? But once that investment was made, the cheap power did attract new industries, as now those regions had something others did not.