Oregon Republicans facing arrest

[Ors Might]

Do you personally want Portland to solve all its problems alone?

I dont think any area should.

So why are some issues local?

Look, I want communities to have a bit more degree of autonomy over their resources. But I’m practical enough to accept that it’s not always possible. Here’s the problem. Those pooled together resources aren’t always spent on the most pressing issues. They’re more often than not spent on what the majority wants. And unfortunately, those things are sometimes exclusive. Not always, but often enough to cause harm to a good number of people.

[Tobleste]

And how are their needs not being met?

To pull an example from ye olde memory banks, there is a serious problem with rural communities being taxed fairly heavily, at least compared to their income, in order to pay for something that would only be used by the larger cities. A public transit system. Because of the distance between the two communities. Now, I’m not saying the cities shouldn’t have a good transit system. I am saying that rural communities should have a say if their taxes go towards a project that can’t feasibly benefit them when those taxes could instead be used to fix problems they’ve been suffering from for a while.

That's a good argument for local government but I'm not sure if it disproportionately hurts rural areas. Iirc, Clinton won far fewer countries than trump but they were far wealthier and most were urban. Presumably those wealthy urban areas generate most of the wealth and have disproportionately less influence in how it's spent.

[Ors Might]

To pull an example from ye olde memory banks, there is a serious problem with rural communities being taxed fairly heavily, at least compared to their income, in order to pay for something that would only be used by the larger cities. A public transit system. Because of the distance between the two communities. Now, I’m not saying the cities shouldn’t have a good transit system. I am saying that rural communities should have a say if their taxes go towards a project that can’t feasibly benefit them when those taxes could instead be used to fix problems they’ve been suffering from for a while.

That's a good argument for local government but I'm not sure if it disproportionately hurts rural areas. Iirc, Clinton won far fewer countries than trump but they were far wealthier and most were urban. Presumably those wealthy urban areas generate most of the wealth and have disproportionately less influence in how it's spent.

By sheer proportionality, that’s likely true. I don’t dispute that there’s injustice in that. But going by harm, I would guess that rural areas are somewhat boned in that regard. I’m not going by any sources here, just assumptions built upon the tendency for communities with less resources to be hit harder than communities with more resources when problems arise.

I should stress that I don’t want urban and rural communities to be at each other’s throats. I’ve been on both sides of that coin and I don’t think that either are inherently bad or good people. But there needs to be a better system of making sure their problems are met and I’m not sure if a democratic one would be ideal. What would, I haven’t the slightest clue. I’m not genius. But even I can tell that something needs to change if the most amount of good is to be achieved.

[The Two Jerseys]

To pull an example from ye olde memory banks, there is a serious problem with rural communities being taxed fairly heavily, at least compared to their income, in order to pay for something that would only be used by the larger cities. A public transit system. Because of the distance between the two communities. Now, I’m not saying the cities shouldn’t have a good transit system. I am saying that rural communities should have a say if their taxes go towards a project that can’t feasibly benefit them when those taxes could instead be used to fix problems they’ve been suffering from for a while.

so if Portland wants to build more light rail or upgrade the airport only the residents of the city should have to pay for it? That's not how taxes work. If that's the case why should they pay for something a small town wants

Why should upstate NY subsidize the MTA instead of the MTA raising its fares?

And don't try to weasel your way out of answering, because you're on the record supporting that.

[San Lumen]

so if Portland wants to build more light rail or upgrade the airport only the residents of the city should have to pay for it? That's not how taxes work. If that's the case why should they pay for something a small town wants

Why should upstate NY subsidize the MTA instead of the MTA raising its fares?

And don't try to weasel your way out of answering, because you're on the record supporting that.

The fares would get so high no one could afford it and they’d go bankrupt

[The Two Jerseys]

Why should upstate NY subsidize the MTA instead of the MTA raising its fares?

And don't try to weasel your way out of answering, because you're on the record supporting that.

The fares would get so high no one could afford it and they’d go bankrupt

Sounds like a local problem.

[Telconi]

So then you do want communities to give up resources that they need. You’re simply hiding that behind the status quo argument. “That’s just how it is” is a bad reason for anything.

Everyone in Oregon is part of the same state. Taxes paid to the state go everywhere. It simply isnt fair that only Portland or the county its in would have to pay for upgrades to the airport, a state highway, or a new light rail line. Plus without the valley's tax money going to rural areas I doubt they'd have the money for the stuff they want.

How pray tell, is it unfair for the city of Portland to be responsible for improvements to the city of Portland?

[Telconi]

Why should upstate NY subsidize the MTA instead of the MTA raising its fares?

And don't try to weasel your way out of answering, because you're on the record supporting that.

The fares would get so high no one could afford it and they’d go bankrupt

I can't' afford a swimming pool. Would it be fair if I forced all of my neighbors to pay in to my swimming pool construction?

[The Two Jerseys]

The fares would get so high no one could afford it and they’d go bankrupt

I can't' afford a swimming pool. Would it be fair if I forced all of my neighbors to pay in to my swimming pool construction?

Only if they elected you neighborhood watch captain in a Free and Fair Election_TM.

[San Lumen]

The fares would get so high no one could afford it and they’d go bankrupt

Sounds like a local problem.

It’s a state agency therefore everyone pays taxes towards it

[The Two Jerseys]

Sounds like a local problem.

It’s a state agency therefore everyone pays taxes towards it

Still a local problem...

[San Lumen]

It’s a state agency therefore everyone pays taxes towards it

Still a local problem...

Ok then rural counties no longer get money from urban ones. They can’t complain when they don’t have enough money to pay for stuff

[Loben The 2nd]

Still a local problem...

Ok then rural counties no longer get money from urban ones. They can’t complain when they don’t have enough money to pay for stuff

A state agency dedicated to one cities problems?

[San Lumen]

Ok then rural counties no longer get money from urban ones. They can’t complain when they don’t have enough money to pay for stuff

A state agency dedicated to one cities problems?

The MTA covers multiple counties not just the five boroughs of NYC.

[Ors Might]

Still a local problem...

Ok then rural counties no longer get money from urban ones. They can’t complain when they don’t have enough money to pay for stuff

As if they had enough money to begin with.

[San Lumen]

Ok then rural counties no longer get money from urban ones. They can’t complain when they don’t have enough money to pay for stuff

As if they had enough money to begin with.

which they dont but being part of the same state means their money goes to fund projects in urban counties and vice versa

[Ors Might]

As if they had enough money to begin with.

which they dont but being part of the same state means their money goes to fund projects in urban counties and vice versa

This vice versa thing doesn’t seem to be panning out, given how many “local issues” they’re facing.

[Telconi]

As if they had enough money to begin with.

which they dont but being part of the same state means their money goes to fund projects in urban counties and vice versa

It does?

[San Lumen]

which they dont but being part of the same state means their money goes to fund projects in urban counties and vice versa

It does?

That’s how government works . Just like your federal taxes go to things like interstate highways in other parts of the country

[Telconi]

It does?

That’s how government works . Just like your federal taxes go to things like interstate highways in other parts of the country

Yes that's how it works in theory, in practice it's quite different.

[Ors Might]

It does?

That’s how government works . Just like your federal taxes go to things like interstate highways in other parts of the country

Unless they’re conveniently “local issues”.