Should Rural Votes be Weighted Against Urban Votes?

[Petrolheadia]

The longer the jobs wait, the higher the pay will be.

In other words, the job's pay will match its value.

Nope, "fuck those who don't need my money". Which is a good idea.

It's implied these folks can just move to the city and not take the tax money.

Never realized you were such a hard line rightist Petrol.

If I were economically far-right, would I be for an increase in low-skilled job wages?

[Torrocca]

So basically, "fuck the poor, I got mine."



Hmm... I wonder why they'd need the tax money to begin with... not like they don't have the funds to make the move to a city life or something... hmmmm

House sales,

I thought these were dead men's towns. Who's gonna buy up a house in a dead man's town?

savings,

Implying people in impoverished areas have the means to adequately save up upwards of hundreds of thousands in a reasonable timespan.

loans,

"How to Push Impoverished People Deeper Into Poverty 101"

[San Lumen]

I wouldn't mind a 'one man one vote' rule being established in my home country. I live in Germany - another Federal Republic with a bicameral legislature, and it's obvious (and probably wanted) that the makeup of the Federal Council (Bundesrat), our state chamber, prefers smaller states over larger ones. As a result, a vote from someone living in the Saarland (that small state in the southwest which Germany "won" back from France in the 1950s) is worth eight times more than mine, as I happen to live in NRW (the largest state by population). Although this doesn't affect the value of my vote on a Federal level, where voting disctricts all have about the same number of people, I do think we should apply this to state level, too. (If a Saarländer is reading this - it's nothing personal against you ^^)
Speaking of the U.S., I can't see anything wrong with the 'one man one vote' thing. No one should be affected positively or negatively regarding the value of their vote just depending on whether they live in Manhattan or in Podunk Hollow. What's more fair than equal representation?

Why shouldn't the Saarlander take it personal? You actively support further silencing what voice they may have. You claim to support equal representation, yet would demolish the representation of various groups simply so that you may have more power.

Should someone in a small town of a few hundred in upstate New York have more of a voice than someone in the Bronx?

[Van Riebeeck Land]

It'd certainly be great to have better jobs than exists in manufacturing or agriculture (work wise), but it does seem like taking what you can get is a much better mindset here...

The thing is, the economy in the south is diversifying pretty fast, and with it jobs. I can tell you, in my neck of the woods (Arkansas) farmland is being sold to become housing, offices, and services left and right; here, you have to be fucking stupid if you can't find a decent paying at worst, job. We don't have a job shortage here, there's a worker shortage. As I travel to other developing rural areas I see the same thing.

[Cranborne]

Never realized you were such a hard line rightist Petrol.

If I were economically far-right, would I be for an increase in low-skilled job wages?

You don't care about the poor so long as they live in rural areas and for whatever reason think it is easy for people just making by to just pack up everything and leave at the drop of a hat. You sound like a GOP Congressman circa 2004 but with a preference for the cities.

[Communist Xomaniax]

One man, one vote. Where you live shouldn't change that.

[Petrolheadia]

House sales,

I thought these were dead men's towns. Who's gonna buy up a house in a dead man's town?

Lots of people buy them in this neck of woods.
It's a cheap way to get a lot of property for little money.

savings,

Implying people in impoverished areas have the means to adequately save up upwards of hundreds of thousands in a reasonable timespan.

Save enough to get out.

loans,

"How to Push Impoverished People Deeper Into Poverty 101"

"How to Invest In Your Future 102"

[Cranborne]

Why shouldn't the Saarlander take it personal? You actively support further silencing what voice they may have. You claim to support equal representation, yet would demolish the representation of various groups simply so that you may have more power.

Should someone in a small town of a few hundred in upstate New York have more of a voice than someone in the Bronx?

At the very least the Bronx should not be allowed to steam roll those in upstate New York against the wishes of the local population. For instance, say a new pipeline wished to be built that would benefit NYC but put upstate New York in greater peril of an oil spill or some other calamity.

[Sungai Pusat]

Force of habit, but yeah mostly rich people getting most of the gains and poor people getting not as much.

Capitalism!*

EAT THE RICH

*Which I'm fine with but jesus is neoliberalism broken/unfixable.

Would you be fine with there only being democratically-owned businesses but there still being capitalism?

Why not? I think most capitalists would argue with that being okay as long as they existed in an overall capitalist framework. (and they do at least seem feasible towards working in any economic system)

It'd certainly be great to have better jobs than exists in manufacturing or agriculture (work wise), but it does seem like taking what you can get is a much better mindset here...

The thing is, the economy in the south is diversifying pretty fast, and with it jobs. I can tell you, in my neck of the woods (Arkansas) farmland is being sold to become housing, offices, and services left and right; here, you have to be fucking stupid if you can't find a decent paying at worst, job. We don't have a job shortage here, there's a worker shortage. As I travel to other developing rural areas I see the same thing.

I see then...

If nothing else, the other issue is probably the skillset not being well matched; there should absolutely be programmes set up to help people retrain. (Unless your argument is that the decent paying jobs are all also entry level somewhere which I wouldn't really believe)

[Conserative Morality]

The sides here are heavily regional. You can't really make regions like the Bible Belt disappear. You can try to use majority to subjugate them into powerlessness and force your politics on them, but this probably A Bad Idea long term, as it will pressure them to bank everything on executive representation, which in turn will pressure growth of executive authority.

How so? When they aren't winning the presidency, there's no urge for them to strengthen the executive.

[Telconi]

I thought these were dead men's towns. Who's gonna buy up a house in a dead man's town?

Lots of people buy them in this neck of woods.
It's a cheap way to get a lot of property for little money.

Implying people in impoverished areas have the means to adequately save up upwards of hundreds of thousands in a reasonable timespan.

Save enough to get out.

"How to Push Impoverished People Deeper Into Poverty 101"

"How to Invest In Your Future 102"

>Save enough

From their job they don't have?

[Torrocca]

I thought these were dead men's towns. Who's gonna buy up a house in a dead man's town?

Lots of people buy them in this neck of woods.
It's a cheap way to get a lot of property for little money.

"For little money" and that itty bitty amount of money's gonna magically be enough to move a person or a whole family into a city /s

Implying people in impoverished areas have the means to adequately save up upwards of hundreds of thousands in a reasonable timespan.

Save enough to get out.

You just like keeping poor people poor, huh? "Oh, just save enough to get out of your poor rural area to move into a city! Oh what's that, because of my advice you didn't have enough to cover a month's worth of living expenses after? Well too bad, enjoy homelessness! At least you're not in those nasty backwoods areas!"

"How to Push Impoverished People Deeper Into Poverty 101"

"How to Invest In Your Future 102"

It's like you're not even acknowledging the reality that millions of people are dealing with.

[San Lumen]

Should someone in a small town of a few hundred in upstate New York have more of a voice than someone in the Bronx?

At the very least the Bronx should not be allowed to steam roll those in upstate New York against the wishes of the local population. For instance, say a new pipeline wished to be built that would benefit NYC but put upstate New York in greater peril of an oil spill or some other calamity.

What do you mean by steam roll? If those in the local community had such concerns they would be raised in the legislature either in committee or on the floor.

[Torrocca]

EAT THE RICH



Would you be fine with there only being democratically-owned businesses but there still being capitalism?

Why not? I think most capitalists would argue with that being okay as long as they existed in an overall capitalist framework. (and they do at least seem feasible towards working in any economic system)

Well you're way better than a lot of capitalists I met then, comrade <3

[Petrolheadia]

EAT THE RICH



Would you be fine with there only being democratically-owned businesses but there still being capitalism?

Why not? I think most capitalists would argue with that being okay as long as they existed in an overall capitalist framework. (and they do at least seem feasible towards working in any economic system)

I agree, but in a situation where employees would have the knowledge to decide, or to appoint directors.

[Telconi]

At the very least the Bronx should not be allowed to steam roll those in upstate New York against the wishes of the local population. For instance, say a new pipeline wished to be built that would benefit NYC but put upstate New York in greater peril of an oil spill or some other calamity.

What do you mean by steam roll? If those in the local community had such concerns they would be raised in the legislature either in committee or on the floor.

You realize that raising an issue in the legislature doesn't actually fix it right?

[Petrolheadia]

Lots of people buy them in this neck of woods.
It's a cheap way to get a lot of property for little money.

"For little money" and that itty bitty amount of money's gonna magically be enough to move a person or a whole family into a city /s

Gotta get started somewhere.

Save enough to get out.

You just like keeping poor people poor, huh? "Oh, just save enough to get out of your poor rural area to move into a city! Oh what's that, because of my advice you didn't have enough to cover a month's worth of living expenses after? Well too bad, enjoy homelessness! At least you're not in those nasty backwoods areas!"

They are poor, not destitute.

"How to Invest In Your Future 102"

It's like you're not even acknowledging the reality that millions of people are dealing with.

I am.
You gotta play to win.

[Sungai Pusat]

Why not? I think most capitalists would argue with that being okay as long as they existed in an overall capitalist framework. (and they do at least seem feasible towards working in any economic system)

Well you're way better than a lot of capitalists I met then, comrade <3

Hooray, I have a communist fren.

Why not? I think most capitalists would argue with that being okay as long as they existed in an overall capitalist framework. (and they do at least seem feasible towards working in any economic system)

I agree, but in a situation where employees would have the knowledge to decide, or to appoint directors.

Well, having a democratic process installed would help people towards that goal, I'd imagine.

[San Lumen]

What do you mean by steam roll? If those in the local community had such concerns they would be raised in the legislature either in committee or on the floor.

You realize that raising an issue in the legislature doesn't actually fix it right?

Yes that is undeniable but many issues do get fixed.

[Torrocca]

"For little money" and that itty bitty amount of money's gonna magically be enough to move a person or a whole family into a city /s

Gotta get started somewhere.

Or better yet, get more investments in their rural area for a safer, more secure way to become a little less poor.

You just like keeping poor people poor, huh? "Oh, just save enough to get out of your poor rural area to move into a city! Oh what's that, because of my advice you didn't have enough to cover a month's worth of living expenses after? Well too bad, enjoy homelessness! At least you're not in those nasty backwoods areas!"

They are poor, not destitute.

You act like taking that huge fucking risk is gonna magically uplift millions out of poverty.

It's like you're not even acknowledging the reality that millions of people are dealing with.

I am.
You gotta play to win.

No, you're really not.

You'd rather leave millions of people impoverished, either in a rural area, "because they're dead men's towns," or in an urban area, "it's sooo easy to move away from those dead men's towns, poor person!" just to stroke your ego wherein this system magically works.

[Petrolheadia]

Gotta get started somewhere.

Or better yet, get more investments in their rural area for a safer, more secure way to become a little less poor.

They are poor, not destitute.

You act like taking that huge fucking risk is gonna magically uplift millions out of poverty.

I am.
You gotta play to win.

No, you're really not.

You'd rather leave millions of people impoverished, either in a rural area, "because they're dead men's towns," or in an urban area, "it's sooo easy to move away from those dead men's towns, poor person!" just to stroke your ego wherein this system magically works.

If they are too poor to move, they should get financial incentives to do so.

Either way, I'd rather spend once to get them out than keep spending.

[San Lumen]

Gotta get started somewhere.

Or better yet, get more investments in their rural area for a safer, more secure way to become a little less poor.

They are poor, not destitute.

You act like taking that huge fucking risk is gonna magically uplift millions out of poverty.

I am.
You gotta play to win.

No, you're really not.

You'd rather leave millions of people impoverished, either in a rural area, "because they're dead men's towns," or in an urban area, "it's sooo easy to move away from those dead men's towns, poor person!" just to stroke your ego wherein this system magically works.

I dont want to see anyone impoverished or left behind but you also cannot deny that more and more people are moving to urban areas.

[Cranborne]

At the very least the Bronx should not be allowed to steam roll those in upstate New York against the wishes of the local population. For instance, say a new pipeline wished to be built that would benefit NYC but put upstate New York in greater peril of an oil spill or some other calamity.

What do you mean by steam roll? If those in the local community had such concerns they would be raised in the legislature either in committee or on the floor.

And yet the Bronx, and NYC in general, has far more representation than those in Tioga County. A single lone voice would be meaningless.

[Cranborne]

Or better yet, get more investments in their rural area for a safer, more secure way to become a little less poor.



You act like taking that huge fucking risk is gonna magically uplift millions out of poverty.



No, you're really not.

You'd rather leave millions of people impoverished, either in a rural area, "because they're dead men's towns," or in an urban area, "it's sooo easy to move away from those dead men's towns, poor person!" just to stroke your ego wherein this system magically works.

I dont want to see anyone impoverished or left behind

Yes, you do.

[San Lumen]

What do you mean by steam roll? If those in the local community had such concerns they would be raised in the legislature either in committee or on the floor.

And yet the Bronx, and NYC in general, has far more representation than those in Tioga County. A single lone voice would be meaningless.

Yes because they have more people therefore more representation. Their representative is not meaningless. If in committee many people spoke out against this hypothetical pipeline its unlikely it would make it to a floor vote.