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

371–380 of 673 posts

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

#371

Post by yesBoot »

_-david-_ wrote: post #320
nscalf wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then they would probably be winning elections on the state level instead of trying to redefine what the state is.

The person you were responding to in all likelihood meant majority of the rural / eastern part of the state not the entire state,

It does not matter.

They have no power in our system to simply upend norms as they choose.

They can pack up and move themselves if they don’t like it.

The onus is not on everyone else to cater to them. It’s to abide laws as they are written within our constitutional system of elections and statutes overseeing them.

I’m not saying that’s ideal. I’m saying that’s how it works.

Down votes do nothing to make it any less true.

If these folks would like to change that, I’m sure blue urban areas and states would love to renegotiate their wealth being extracted to fund rural communities.

https://wallethub.com/edu/states-most-least-dependent-on-the...

Ironically, Idaho is a bigger grifter on Federal welfare than Oregon.

So they want a more conservative way of life? Which appears to mean “more welfare for me”.

If they dig into the history a bit they’d learn rural life was subsidized to begin with, with the government paying business to move out of urban areas.

Using government to change the rules for all is not “little government”. Upending state borders out of spite is hardly a “conservative” solution.

Their entire platform is laughable given the reality.

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

#372

Post by KeytarHero »

omni wrote: post #315
bsder wrote: post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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."

Well for one, House representatives are apportioned based on population.

Is there enough population in these counties to make any difference?

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

#373

Post by dumbfoundded »

generalizations wrote: post #335
dumbfoundded wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your response is disgustingly incorrect. President Obama's election as the first black president certainly included significant racial elements. When comparing it to Clinton vs Dole in 1996, Clinton lost the white vote 42% to 44% (1). Obama lost the white vote 43% to 55% (2). Both Clinton and Obama won by 8% differences. Yes, not voting for the black candidate over the white candidate doesn't make you racist. But to…

You left out something important. In 1996, Clinton won the African-American vote 84% to 12%. In 2008, Obama won the African-American vote 95% to 4%. That's a far larger difference. You're right: let's not ignore race. By your own logic, if you're saying the white polling numbers show white racism, then you have to admit that the African American polling numbers show far more extreme racism on the part of African Amer…

I know you already know how silly this comparison is. Replace White with Han Chinese and Black with Uyghur if you need help.

It's not exactly a surprise when the repressed and discriminated against minority sees race as a more important issue. Equating racism without considering the context of who holds what power is simply disingenuous.

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

#374

Post by newacct583 »

tacitusarc wrote: post #235
ABeeSea wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Republican Reagan signed EMTALA which makes it so hospitals can’t refuse service in emergencies due to ability to pay. It stopped people from dying in the street. They did not fund this new mandate and so we currently pay for this through higher insurance premiums and county/municipal emergency service budgets. Universal healthcare would be a more efficient way to pay for an already existing benefit. When uninsured c…

I live in a predominantly right-leaning area and know a lot of people who are against universal healthcare. I've talked with a lot of them about it, and every single person would be in favor of it if there was a magical guarantee the money would actually be spent properly and not corruptly misallocated. But the track record is so poor, and there is such little transparency, that they have no trust whatsoever. I can h…

> But the track record is so poor, and there is such little transparency, that they have no trust whatsoever.

The track record of... Medicare? It's one of the most popular programs in government!

What you've done is just aborb spin. It's true that these people don't trust "The Government" to provide health care, because their thought leaders (and peers like you) keep telling them that. But then they go and enroll in Medicare anyway, and it pays for their care, and because nothing breaks and it's never in the news they don't even think about it.

At some point you'd think the truth would break through, but it just doesn't seem to be happening.

Literally every health care system sucks for someone, it's a complicated problem. But everywhere, both within and outside the US, the systems that work BEST are government-run.

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

#375

Post by torstenvl »

ModernMech wrote: post #314
buzzert wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my city (San Francisco), the Tenderloin is nationally famous for having an "open-air drug market", which means a place you can go to _buy_ drugs with impunity. It also happens to be one of the most dystopian parts of the city, rampent with crime, overdoses, unsanitary conditions, and needles everywhere. It seems like any rational person could see the connection between drugs and the dystopian aspects of the Tender…

> I would make it impossible for them to acquire drugs But how? Drugs are already illegal. There is currently a vast government apparatus designed to make drugs impossible to acquire. The US has the largest prison population on the planet due in no small part to the war on drugs. It's not like we go easy on drugs. And yet, in your city there is an "open-air drug market". Making drugs illegal doesn't make drugs harder…

> But how? Drugs are already illegal.

Now do automatic weapons, straw purchases, felons getting guns, etc.

Both sides have their political bugaboos about problems that haven't been completely solved by existing approaches. Both sides want to try something different by cracking down on their own citizens; both sides want to try something different by lessening the burdens on good people who don't hurt others. Unfortunately, the two major political parties take opposite positions on which approach to take with which issue.

Maybe our political discourse wouldn't get quite to the level of talking about secession if we tried to understand one another's values a little better.

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

#376

Post by ModernMech »

torstenvl wrote: post #375
ModernMech wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I would make it impossible for them to acquire drugs But how? Drugs are already illegal. There is currently a vast government apparatus designed to make drugs impossible to acquire. The US has the largest prison population on the planet due in no small part to the war on drugs. It's not like we go easy on drugs. And yet, in your city there is an "open-air drug market". Making drugs illegal doesn't make drugs harder…

> But how? Drugs are already illegal. Now do automatic weapons, straw purchases, felons getting guns, etc. Both sides have their political bugaboos about problems that haven't been completely solved by existing approaches. Both sides want to try something different by cracking down on their own citizens; both sides want to try something different by lessening the burdens on good people who don't hurt others. Unfortun…

I'm sorry, but what does this have to do with guns? I don't think anyone in this thread brought up guns at all.

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

#377

Post by chrononaut »

_qwfv wrote: post #239
jfrunyon wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Who gets to decide what an "American *" is? Their intended audience. Keep in mind, this is written to appeal to someone who is already likely to agree that Oregon is handling these topics poorly.

I think I'm mostly just expressing frustration that this actually works. That anyone looks at that phrasing and says, "Yes, this makes sense."

Unfortunately logical fallacies are often used in much of political messaging, which far precedes the current climate.

https://propagandaprinciples.wordpress.com/logical-fallacies...

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

#378

Post by Thrymr »

Ericson2314 wrote: post #357
omni wrote: post #315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well for one, House representatives are apportioned based on population.

That's fine, it doesn't matter what state the representative is associated with, and baring rounding errors the number of representatives would stay roughly the same? The more worrisome effect is on the electoral college and the senate, but I think tying this to DC statehood would get rid of that.

> it doesn't matter what state the representative is associated with, and baring rounding errors the number of representatives would stay roughly the same?

The [Republican] Idaho legislature would get to gerrymand the districts instead of the [Democratic] Oregon legislature.

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

#379

Post by ethbr0 »

causality0 wrote: post #305
URSpider94 wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Total installed powerline length vs population is a problem.

Whether they're new / old or well / poorly serviced is just a difference of a few decades.

If there isn't money to service old lines now, then there won't be money to service formerly-new lines in 30 years.

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

#380

Post by mrcartmenez »

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…

It’s simply that lower childhood IQ at age 5 is an indicator of conservatism in adults.

One might interpret this as people who find it hard to understand the world are often easier to fool into thinking their problems are because of someone else, or to scare into believing that what they do have is at risk from “others”.

Post reply on HN