Five Oregon counties vote to leave state, create 'Greater Idaho' • Hacker News Board

Re: Five Oregon counties vote to leave state, create 'Greater Idaho'

#181

Post by akomtu » Thu, May 20, 2021, 9:22 PM UTC

GongOfFour wrote: post #88

mjevans wrote: post #35

Given the article's mention of Rural vs Urban I lean towards the belief that this is driven by a sense of both conservative values in government and probably a lack of understanding in how the government of the people serves the people. More precisely how taxes and math work. The GAO and similar offices should do a better job of preparing reports on where every collected tax dollar is being spent; both in the physica…

Here is the website for one of the groups pushing for this: https://www.greateridaho.org/ Taxes are just one part of this. They list these other issues of concern: > 1. American Values: Oregon will continue to violate more and more American values and American freedoms because normal rural Americans are outnumbered in Oregon. Not in Idaho. Addicts will be attracted to Oregon from all over the world by the 2020 drug d…

Looks like it's the old dispute about 2A and I kind of understand them. Last time I heard, Oregon voted to outlaw mags with more than 10 bullets. Rural folks have disagreed and resolved the conflict in a civil manner: by declaring that they will have different laws from the big city Oregon.

Re: Five Oregon counties vote to leave state, create 'Greater Idaho'

#182

Post by iwasakabukiman » Thu, May 20, 2021, 9:22 PM UTC

This article title is grossly misleading. As far as I can tell from the article, no actual votes have happened.

The group behind this is just pushing for counties to support them.

These types of groups pop up all the time, make hay and then disappear.

Re: Five Oregon counties vote to leave state, create 'Greater Idaho'

#183

Post by BobbyJo » Thu, May 20, 2021, 9:23 PM UTC

mjevans wrote: post #35

Given the article's mention of Rural vs Urban I lean towards the belief that this is driven by a sense of both conservative values in government and probably a lack of understanding in how the government of the people serves the people. More precisely how taxes and math work. The GAO and similar offices should do a better job of preparing reports on where every collected tax dollar is being spent; both in the physica…

>My personal believe is presently, for lack of data that I can digest, that the far right is probably focused around emotions

Both sides have appeals to emotion and appeals to logic in their platform. For instance, what basis is there for universal healthcare other than 'we should help each other'? You can't make the argument that it would 'save the government money' to the right, because, in their opinion, the government should be spending any money on it, other than maybe paying for employees' insurance. Every dollar the government spends on it now is just an example of how the government can't do anything right.

I think it's common for people on opposite ends of the spectrum see the other side as 'not grounded in data'. After all, if they saw the reason in the opinions of the other side, they'd be in the middle instead of the end they're on.

All that being said, I think more clarity in government spending would go a long way in creating more/less trust in government's handling of certain operations. Maybe the right sees less inefficiency than they imagined, maybe the left sees more, but we'd at least have some real data to compare.

Re: Five Oregon counties vote to leave state, create 'Greater Idaho'

#184

Post by rhacker » Thu, May 20, 2021, 9:23 PM UTC

mjevans wrote: post #35

Given the article's mention of Rural vs Urban I lean towards the belief that this is driven by a sense of both conservative values in government and probably a lack of understanding in how the government of the people serves the people. More precisely how taxes and math work. The GAO and similar offices should do a better job of preparing reports on where every collected tax dollar is being spent; both in the physica…

I own land in a rural area (house coming in maybe a year) and I have spoken to the neighbors. For the most part it's little things actually. Rules that the major cities deal with, like not being allowed to put up a specific kind of fence because the bureaucrats in the city look at .1 acre plots of land and don't like how certain fences look - where out here we're dealing with 5 to 100 acres (and in some cases a 40000 acres of land). Or that we should be required to pay "school fees" when we build a house because there's "no fucking school" out here! One guy had to dismantle a building he erected (he's a builder) because he maxed out on "how much roof" he can have.

There was one guy talking about Jesus but for the most part we're pretty sure he wasn't an anti-masker. Actually all of our neighbors have told us they wear a mask by the way. So yeah, it's really just getting away from the legal requirements that the populated places need but forget to loosen the rules far away.

Now every county is different so take my input as a grain of salt.

Re: Five Oregon counties vote to leave state, create 'Greater Idaho'

#185

Post by ipaddr » Thu, May 20, 2021, 9:24 PM UTC

URSpider94 wrote: post #85

mjevans wrote: post #35

Given the article's mention of Rural vs Urban I lean towards the belief that this is driven by a sense of both conservative values in government and probably a lack of understanding in how the government of the people serves the people. More precisely how taxes and math work. The GAO and similar offices should do a better job of preparing reports on where every collected tax dollar is being spent; both in the physica…

I would love to see the data, but from the data I have seen, the data conflict with the popular (populist) narrative. A lot of people in America seem to believe that the hardworking "real Americans" in the middle of the country are subsidizing the poorly-run coastal liberal enclaves. In reality, the money almost always flows in the other direction; taxpayers in cities are subsidizing the rural-dwellers. This has noth…

The need for many government programs (money spent on enforcing hollywood copyright) and the tax rules that create corporate wealth but cost other areas must be considered. The midwest could do away with many expensive budget items but are forced to pay a share.

The wealth of the nation could flip if heavy import duties were imposed forcing a manufacturing back inhouse.

Things are the way they are because the powerful like it.

Re: Five Oregon counties vote to leave state, create 'Greater Idaho'

#186

Post by klyrs » Thu, May 20, 2021, 9:24 PM UTC

buzzert wrote: post #138

ncallaway wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If drugs have been criminalized for decades, and that has led to overdoses being at an all time high, isn’t that just a pretty strong point of evidence that criminalizing drugs isn’t an effective means to prevent overdoses? We tried that strategy for many decades. It has failed as a strategy for decades. I don’t think that’s necessarily evidence that decriminalization will work, but it seems like...maybe we should at…

“Try something else”, as in the complete polar opposite of what we were trying before? I cannot rationalize such a decision.

We tried prohibition of alcohol for a time, and then rolled that back when it was obvious that the experiment failed.

Decriminalization has its own issues, to be sure. I'd prefer legalization (the actual polar opposite). I want addicts to be able to buy a clean supply from a legitimate business. The US won't see a reduction in organized crime until we offer a path to legitimacy. Decriminalization is the easiest, but least effective middle ground.

Re: Five Oregon counties vote to leave state, create 'Greater Idaho'

#187

Post by alfalfasprout » Thu, May 20, 2021, 9:24 PM UTC

DaniloDias wrote: post #178

shaftoe wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you notice that you've defined your own viewpoint as rational and supported by data and the viewpoint of others as "probably focused around emotions"?

OP’s structure of argument should be a well established anti-pattern. I wish more people recognized that it is a tempting and lazy logical fallacy. It is fundamentally disrespectful to assume that people who don’t agree with you are too emotional. If you make this argument, you are killing your own argument, unless you support it with facts. OP demonstrates this uncharitability by asserting a lack of data, and then a…

It's particularly troubling language because depending on who the subject is, the validity of the argument is often treated differently.

For example, If OP had made this argument about women I don't think we'd see so many upvotes on the comment and we'd see a lot more uproar. Despite the fact that women are routinely dismissed as being "emotional".

Here, OP presents that there is insufficient data to hop to conclusions. That said, OP still dismisses "conservatives" on the premise of acting purely on emotion. The irony seems lost on OP but also other HN viewers.

Re: Five Oregon counties vote to leave state, create 'Greater Idaho'

#188

Post by kirillzubovsky » Thu, May 20, 2021, 9:24 PM UTC

AlotOfReading wrote: post #83

avalys wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe they like their home, their community, and their neighborhood, but what they don’t like is having a bunch of people living in population centers far away who don’t share their values telling them how to live their lives?

I don't know if you've lived in a lot of these places, but most of them are utterly dependent on those population centers to meet their basic medical, financial, and infrastructure needs. The cores in turn need resources from the peripheries to sustain themselves. There's no reason any of this has to be oppositional, except that the rural counties are pissed off about elections and lockdowns right now.

I don't quite agree with this view based on what I've seen/heard from small town folks.

The narrative that rural counties depend on the centers for their infrastructure needs is a view that was created by the cities. In practice, people is small towns and rural counties are extremely self-sufficient. They know help isn't coming their way, and therefore are totally okay doing what needs to be done to preserve their communities' health. People grow their veggies, raise their own pigs, hold three jobs to pay the bills ...etc.

People in small towns really couldn't give 2 f()cks about people from the city, but they get pissed off because city people come and try to tell them what to do. Basically, they've not asked for any help from cities before, so why should they be handed down constrains now?

At least that's what I've seen.

Re: Five Oregon counties vote to leave state, create 'Greater Idaho'

#189

Post by cratermoon » Thu, May 20, 2021, 9:25 PM UTC

buzzert wrote: post #113

joshka wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have rational data that would present this viewpoint as otherwise? How about helping us liberals understand the conservative viewpoint better if you have insight on this. Edit: please don't downvote based on disagreement - write something instead. This is a reasonable question asking to further understand the conservative viewpoint. Case in point, I'm upvoting buzzert's comments because they present a contrary…

One particular example might be Oregon’s decision to decriminalize all drugs[0] during a time when overdoses are at an all time high[1] and increasing over 40% in just the last year. You might say the political party who calls the war on drugs “cruel and inhumane” is acting on emotion rather than reason in spite of all the statistics. [0]: https://drugpolicy.org/press-release/2021/02/drug-decriminal... [1]: https://w…

> decriminalize all drugs[0] during a time when overdoses are at an all time high[1] and increasing over 40% in just the last year.

You're assuming overdose rates are negatively correlated with criminalization of drugs. Have you considered the possibility that it's exactly the opposite, then when drugs are decriminalized, people can have access to better information and health care?

If you're a professional and you have alcoholism, you can get care and treatment, and it may even be paid for by your employer's health care plant. If you're addicted to cocaine, OxyContin, hydrocodone, or amphetamines, then maybe one day you OD because you never talk about it and you don't see a doctor about it, for fear of being convicted of a crime, losing your job, your health care, and ending up in prison or homeless.

Re: Five Oregon counties vote to leave state, create 'Greater Idaho'

#190

Post by krapp » Thu, May 20, 2021, 9:25 PM UTC

bilbo0s wrote: post #66

krapp wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Humans don't work that way. We always create hierarchies of power and control, it's innate to our primate nature.

Put more simply, no one would agree to the idealistic utopian-like rule of "no conquering".

Plenty would agree to it, with their fingers crossed behind their backs of course.