3 ms·
You are not understanding our point. If these rural areas want to break away and go their own way, they wont have the resources to combat crisis on their own,
by saboot 4y ago
You are not understanding our point.
If these rural areas want to break away and go their own way, they wont have the resources to combat crisis on their own, they can't even do that with their current tax revenue and I don't imagine they are willing to quadruple their property taxes to do so.
I expect they'll whine and yell at other states if they need help. However I'd hope the gov of the remaining area of oregon would flatly tell them no, at least I would.
- BackBlast 4y agoThe apparent subsidies are not properly addressing their concerns. Thus, however much money it sent — it doesn't matter. How does this not address your point of "they are subsidized!!"? Again. If the state policies prevent proper management of the resources, the money doesn't matter. It's misapplied. The point that they don't have the resources. No, they don't have the resources to replicate what the state is doing. Parent's point is correct in that. But my point is that they don't WANT to replicate what the state is doing. It's misapplied. Thus, making the cost of the state programs irrelevant. You are assuming that everything on the budget is required to create a functional government. It's not.
- saboot 4y agoI'm speaking strictly about emergency response such as fires, I'm not assuming 'Greater Idaho' is going to have a matching education or social services budget.