4 ms·
How much do we want to subsidize people who choose to live in less populated areas? This will probably come up with roads and utilities at some point, also. Di
by mikem170 3y ago
How much do we want to subsidize people who choose to live in less populated areas?
This will probably come up with roads and utilities at some point, also. Did we build a lot of infrastructure in less dense areas during boom times, similar to how China was recently building, with little regard for the long term sustainability costs? One day some of those currently paved roads in the country may need to be allowed to revert to dirt. If only a few people live on a long road they obviously can't pay for it themselves.
The article does mention things like farming and mining that take place in rural areas, where workers may want nearby health care. Perhaps the companies profiting from these activities should pay these costs?
There's also the idea of subsidizing elderly people who choose to live in the middle of nowhere. I'm not sure how many people would be in favor of that. It's been over a hundred years since we lived in a small town farming economy. These places have been emptying out for a long time.
- zokier 3y ago> Perhaps the companies profiting from these activities should pay? This is how you get company towns, and they don't have exactly stellar history.
- mikem170 3y agoI wasn't thinking of normal towns with a variety of people, but instead something more like oil rigs, or Alaska oil fields, or some military bases, where pretty much only workers are present, and they rotate in and out on a schedule. Farming for example has already become quite automated, not so many actual people are needed. Same for mining. Should everyone who chooses to move to the middle of get a paved road and emergency room subsidized by others? Or just the people who are grandfathered in? Wouldn't it make more sense for these people to move if their needs are not being met, as so many already have?