Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

upi.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 673 posts

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

#301

Post by _-david-_ »

shaftoe wrote: post #72
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…

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"?

This is a major issue today. People do not understand why people with different views hold the views they hold. There is an assumption that the other people are not data driven, are just emotional and cling to the way things used to be. I think one reason is the completely different lifestyles held by people. We have some people in urban / suburban areas and some some people in rural. So many people who do not live in rural areas have never even been to such an area for any extended period of time. They don't get to know the people or mentality thst comes with it.

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

#302

Post by bsder »

not2b wrote: post #220

The US constitution requires that, for this to happen, Congress, the Oregon legislature, and the Idaho legislature must all agree. There's no provision that it is a matter that local country residents get to decide.

I don't see why Oregon would object unless there is some industry out there that is paying megabucks in taxes.

Dumping a bunch of people sucking down more money than they pay seems like a win for Oregon.

Idaho, on the other hand, might object. That would be comedy gold.

"We secede." "Congratulations! Good luck finding somebody who wants you, though."

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

#303

Post by Enginerrrd »

oogabooga123 wrote: post #143
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…

What a patronizing take. No wonder they want to leave, if they’re governed by people with your attitude.

You're being downvoted because your statement is a bit inflammatory and leaps to condemnation. However, it is otherwise a very accurate take in my opinion. OP has presented their view as inherently rational, correct, and moral, and presented conservative views as "emotional" or "lacking understanding". That type of moral assertion absolutely IS one of the main complaints I see from rural conservatives about urban liberals.

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

#304

Post by thoughtstheseus »

ghaff wrote: post #240
philistine wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But you are urban. You are near a major city, and adjacent another small one like you said. Urban versus rural is not a measure of closeness to nature, it's a measure of closeness to other humans.

It depends on your definitions. A lot of people would object to defining urban as encompassing having to drive anywhere except to connect to immediate neighbors. I can basically go to my two immediate neighbors. Otherwise I have to get in a car. Is that urban?

Sounds like a suburb. The real inefficient structures.

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

#305

Post by causality0 »

URSpider94 wrote: post #112
UncleOxidant wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Part of this has to do with how we've been able to drive down agricultural costs by means of automation over the last century which has driven a move away from family farms to larger corporate farms. In 1900, just under 40 percent of the total US population lived on farms, and 60 percent lived in rural areas. Today, the respective figures are only about 1 percent and 20 percent.[1] Sure the coasts are creating more e…

I definitely don't think we should ignore or minimize the contributions of rural Americans. I do think we need to do a better job of making the costs associated with rural life more explicit. This is a big deal in California, where people have pushed further and further into the wilderness, putting themselves at huge risk for wildfires while also increasing the number of miles of power lines that need to be built and…

New power lines are almost never the cause of wildfires. Old, poorly-maintained lines are. For example, the Camp fire that killed 86 people was caused by a hundred year old line that hadn't been serviced in decades. For miles of line around the origin site of the fire the C-hooks looked like this: https://i.imgur.com/r42KsHR.jpg

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

#306

Post by edoceo »

ghaff wrote: post #240
philistine wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But you are urban. You are near a major city, and adjacent another small one like you said. Urban versus rural is not a measure of closeness to nature, it's a measure of closeness to other humans.

It depends on your definitions. A lot of people would object to defining urban as encompassing having to drive anywhere except to connect to immediate neighbors. I can basically go to my two immediate neighbors. Otherwise I have to get in a car. Is that urban?

Rural is defined in USA here: https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/rural-economy-population/rur...

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

#307

Post by philwelch »

yongjik wrote: post #98
philwelch wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s explained in their FAQ: > Idahoans are very concerned about keeping their state as conservative as possible. They had 2.46 conservative votes per liberal vote in the 2016 presidential election, but eastern Washington only had 1.43. > Moreover, eastern Washington has a population of 1.6 million in 2017, as compared to Idaho’s population of 1.7 million. Idahoans don’t want to be outvoted by others in their own sta…

Geez, they aren't even hiding that they're gerrymandering for a jumbo Republican state (with the added "benefit" that the remaining OR and CA will become even more Democrat). Exactly what the US needs in 2021. I'm half amused and half horrified.

Gerrymandering has to do with influencing representation in the US Congress. I think this has more to do with state government, particularly the ability for more people to live under the type of state government they would prefer. Portlanders would probably prefer an even more liberal state government than Oregon already has while eastern Oregonians evidently prefer the Idaho state government to their own.

I sincerely think this is exactly what the US needs: a civil agreement that you people can live over there under the laws that you prefer, while we can live here under the laws that we prefer, and that we coexist as a federation of states instead of just fighting to impose a single national politics on everyone.

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

#308

Post by chmod600 »

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…

"Though I find understanding the deeply divided viewpoints in the US very elusive."

It's not a big mystery. A lot of politicians are making their careers by dividing people.

Some policies are just downright mean, and seem to serve little purpose other than division.

Conservative/rural people are often on the receiving end, because they just don't have a large enough constituency to fight it. Sure, they are winning some battles, but each one is uphill and the slope is steepening rapidly.

Sadly, the country will suffer greatly. The left is wrong on a lot of things (or at least too extreme), but they are in control and there will be little pushback going forward. Even moderate democrats are being trampled.

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

#309

Post by arrosenberg »

light_hue_1 wrote: post #286
CountDrewku wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you need to read up on why the subsidies were started in the first place because you're obviously clueless. The rest of your argument is laden with all sorts of cognitive dissonance. Subsidies are given for things like food because if a society doesn't of have food it's a really bad thing so the government props up the industry in bad times (in this case during the Great Depression) and we don't starve. It's…

Yeah, you should definitely read up on how farming subsidies came about. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agricultural_policy_of_the_Uni... Food got so stupidly cheap it makes no sense to grow it in the US anymore. So farmers demanded that people in cities pay for their lifestyles out of our taxes. And then they go around being entitled about it. I've had enough of farm welfare queens. Get farmers off of welfare and let…

Even though I understand your outrage, it's a terrible idea to move our food chain abroad instead of subsidizing farmers. That's a huge national security risk.

It would be better if the subsidies were limited to smallholders on ~100 acres or less, which would resolve the rural depression issue.

Post reply on HN