4 ms·

I think there are credible arguments about investing less in education and research. At a really basic level, imagine if you are a retired couple in a small to

I think there are credible arguments about investing less in education and research. At a really basic level, imagine if you are a retired couple in a small town. You pay a lot of taxes that goes to support a school you don't have any kids at and a university you didn't go to. That's something like the state of the world for a lot of voters in parts of the United States-- aging / dying rural towns and exurbs. When the greater good is the extreme wealth of coastal cities (and I think it is!) you can see there lots of places that really don't want to pay for it. Another good argument against our subsidy of education (although maybe not against research) is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Case_Against_Education https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Case_Against_Education I don't really agree, and I am surprised there are people here who would argue against funding research.

LarsDu88 1y ago
If this is what many people perceive, it does not actually align with what is going on in the United States today. What's actually happening is that most of the wealth and tax revenue is generated by the coastal metropolitan areas of the US, which basically subsidize the rural inland regions of the country. Things like Medicare which those same rural folks vote against. This is because the amount of wealth generated by science and technology vastly outweighs what is being generated by rural areas of the country. Now we cut off the pipeline and investment into those wealth generating areas so that long term, the nation will head into decline...
- ashoeafoot 1y ago
  The costal vampire empires rob those towns of youth and future
  - LarsDu88 1y ago
    The youth leave because there is no future in those rural and former manufacturing areas of the country. The solution by the current administration is to weaken the dollar, but this is basically robbing everyone... when the dollar goes down by 15%, its the same as torching 15% of everyone's money -- same as inflation. The correct solution is to tax the disproportionately wealthy oligarchs of those coastal vampire companies... the tech monopolies which implicitly levy taxes on all online transactions (Google's 30% cut on android apps, Google's 70% cut on all advertising, Steam's 30% cut on all PC games, Amazon's cut on all online shopping transactions), then reinvest that money into rural industries to make manufacturing competitive. Instead the solution has been to levy a tax on all consumers over all trade, which tends to make local manufacturing less competitive over the long run.
- georgeecollins 1y ago
  I agree with your argument that the metropolis (and the educated elite) creates the wealth that subsidizes the country. But if you are a politician in the non-metropolis you aren't going to frame it that way. No one wants to hear their region or lifestyle is unimportant. Also, regardless of the true economic value it is clear that lots of people in the US and the UK don't just vote their wallets, they vote their values. IMO Brexit was a populist self-own. It's hard to know what choice is going to make you better off in five years but pretty easy to know which choice makes you feel better about yourself. See: wars!
  - LarsDu88 1y ago
    I used to think all these rural areas voted their values over their wallets, but I'm starting to not be so sure any more. You see this in both Russia and the United States, where these rural and ethnic minority areas of seem to gladly send their children off to war. Liberals like to think this is some sort of quasi-genocidal policy when it applies to the Buryats or the Tuvans, but if you watch the videos of the guys shipping off to war, their happy and smiling. They are happy because they are getting a paycheck! Same deal with illegal immigration in the United States. Christian values are to "do unto others as you would have done to yourself", but Christian conservatives all vote to brutalize immigrants and cut social services (which are all subsidized by California anyways!). Why is this? It's because going to war is a way to get a paycheck in an arguably less shameful way than living off the dole, and kicking illegal immigrants out is kicking out the competition for low wage jobs. People absolutely are voting for their wallets, but in such a way that they don't live with the shame of taking handouts.

LarsDu88 1y ago

If this is what many people perceive, it does not actually align with what is going on in the United States today. What's actually happening is that most of the wealth and tax revenue is generated by the coastal metropolitan areas of the US, which basically subsidize the rural inland regions of the country. Things like Medicare which those same rural folks vote against. This is because the amount of wealth generated by science and technology vastly outweighs what is being generated by rural areas of the country. Now we cut off the pipeline and investment into those wealth generating areas so that long term, the nation will head into decline...

ashoeafoot 1y ago
The costal vampire empires rob those towns of youth and future
- LarsDu88 1y ago
  The youth leave because there is no future in those rural and former manufacturing areas of the country. The solution by the current administration is to weaken the dollar, but this is basically robbing everyone... when the dollar goes down by 15%, its the same as torching 15% of everyone's money -- same as inflation. The correct solution is to tax the disproportionately wealthy oligarchs of those coastal vampire companies... the tech monopolies which implicitly levy taxes on all online transactions (Google's 30% cut on android apps, Google's 70% cut on all advertising, Steam's 30% cut on all PC games, Amazon's cut on all online shopping transactions), then reinvest that money into rural industries to make manufacturing competitive. Instead the solution has been to levy a tax on all consumers over all trade, which tends to make local manufacturing less competitive over the long run.
georgeecollins 1y ago
I agree with your argument that the metropolis (and the educated elite) creates the wealth that subsidizes the country. But if you are a politician in the non-metropolis you aren't going to frame it that way. No one wants to hear their region or lifestyle is unimportant. Also, regardless of the true economic value it is clear that lots of people in the US and the UK don't just vote their wallets, they vote their values. IMO Brexit was a populist self-own. It's hard to know what choice is going to make you better off in five years but pretty easy to know which choice makes you feel better about yourself. See: wars!
- LarsDu88 1y ago
  I used to think all these rural areas voted their values over their wallets, but I'm starting to not be so sure any more. You see this in both Russia and the United States, where these rural and ethnic minority areas of seem to gladly send their children off to war. Liberals like to think this is some sort of quasi-genocidal policy when it applies to the Buryats or the Tuvans, but if you watch the videos of the guys shipping off to war, their happy and smiling. They are happy because they are getting a paycheck! Same deal with illegal immigration in the United States. Christian values are to "do unto others as you would have done to yourself", but Christian conservatives all vote to brutalize immigrants and cut social services (which are all subsidized by California anyways!). Why is this? It's because going to war is a way to get a paycheck in an arguably less shameful way than living off the dole, and kicking illegal immigrants out is kicking out the competition for low wage jobs. People absolutely are voting for their wallets, but in such a way that they don't live with the shame of taking handouts.