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

461–470 of 673 posts

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

#461

Post by refurb »

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.

[flagged]

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

#462

Post by DFHippie »

srswtf123 wrote: post #368
SllX wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We have have that every two years: it’s called elections.

If every state is gerrymandered beyond all sanity, are any of our elections valid?

Also, not all states are equally gerrymandered. Vermont and Wyoming each have a single representative, so they have no electoral boundaries to manipulate. And California uses a non-partisan electoral commission to adjust electoral boundaries. In states where redistricting is still a partisan process it is not all equally shameless.

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

#463

Post by reddog »

thepasswordis wrote: post #128
URSpider94 wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Those people in the middle of the country believe that if they all quit their jobs and demanded a government-given wage, that the country would starve to death. If all of the people at facebook, google, and twitter quit their jobs, however, all that would really happen would be that the country would get a bit more peaceful. You're talking about how much is taken in taxes. These people are talking about how much is g…

Easy choice. I'd pick food, lumber, minerals, manufacturing and energy every time over iFart apps, collateralized debt instruments, oxycontin and Disney movies.

And the idea that us smart people should just outsource all that physical labor stuff to 3rd-world mouth breathers may work for the moment, but just wait until there is a crisis or war.

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

#464

Post by remarkEon »

kasey_junk wrote: post #425
icelancer wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Often forgotten about "subsidization" of one group to another - which area is more likely to have higher participation in the military and armed forces, and deaths in foreign conflict zones?

The military doesn’t track deaths in combat zones by race. They do track participation: https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/demographics-us-military Per those numbers whites/blacks/Hispanics are more represented in the military than similar civilian occupations. There is a higher percentage of Hispanic and black women in the military that might lower combat death numbers but there are a lot less high level black & Hispa…

The diversity of the military respective to the civilian population is not uniform (no pun intended). There are significant racial differences between services, and branches within services (e.g. infantry versus a combat support branch like quartermaster). It's very difficult to find accurate public data on this subject, but "the military is extremely diverse" is not as clear cut a statement as many seem to think it is.

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

#465

Post by CameronNemo »

erehweb wrote: post #160

If this did happen, what would be impact on EC votes and House seats?

Probably minimal. The amount of population moving would be tiny.

More significant is the natural resources that the population coinhabits the land with.

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

#466

Post by refurb »

marricks wrote: post #60

As an left Oregonian I think this would be a win-win. Oregon is an extremely liberal state in the valley but outside of metropolitan areas, obviously not. Our state legislature is regularly shut down and forced to cater to far right views. Like, these conservative congressman refuse to show up and literally shut it down so nothing gets done. Liberal congresspeople in general not willing to do anything besides chastis…

So the whole legislature doesn't get big progressives projects done as much as they might otherwise.

But that’s how it’s supposed to work? If only a portion of your electorate supports progressive projects then it’s not supposed to be easy to pass them.

Your statement is really bizarre.

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

#467

Post by tppiotrowski » 

  Grant voted 1,471 to 895 for county officials “to meet and discuss relocating Idaho border.”

  Lake voted 1,341 to 463 for the “relocation of Idaho border” to be taken up in “county board of commissioners meetings.”

  Malheur voted 3,050 to 2,572 for “county court meetings regarding relocation of Oregon-Idaho border.”

  Sherman voted 429 to 260 in favor of “promoting moving Oregon-Idaho border.”

  Baker voted 3,064 to 2,307 for county commissioners “to meet three times per year to discuss a proposal to include 18 counties, including Baker, as part of Idaho,” the Baker City Herald reported. Baker County results are not yet available from the Oregon Secretary of State’s Office.
Seems like this vote was to start "meetings" and "discussions" [1]. No one is leaving the state yet.

[1] https://www.oregonlive.com/politics/2021/05/more-oregon-coun...

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

#468

Post by ineptech »

catgary wrote: post #252
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.

Would Oregon necessarily be against this? This seems like a great way to (a) get rid of nut jobs from the state legislature, and (b) get rid of a bunch of counties that sinkholes (financially speaking).

> Would Oregon necessarily be against this?

Yes, Western/urban/blue Oregon is against this. I don't think there's a simple self-interest-based reason like "we would lose X if they left," but it is considered an unserious idea, would involve large-but-not-well-understood costs, and there's no reason to do it.

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

#469

Post by bobthepanda »

tppiotrowski wrote: post #467

Grant voted 1,471 to 895 for county officials “to meet and discuss relocating Idaho border.” Lake voted 1,341 to 463 for the “relocation of Idaho border” to be taken up in “county board of commissioners meetings.” Malheur voted 3,050 to 2,572 for “county court meetings regarding relocation of Oregon-Idaho border.” Sherman voted 429 to 260 in favor of “promoting moving Oregon-Idaho border.” Baker voted 3,064 to 2,307…

There’s also the question of whether or not Idaho would actually want to take them.

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

#470

Post by maxerickson »

UncleOxidant wrote: post #106
URSpider94 wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

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…

Farms have gotten bigger, but family farms still dominate.

https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/farm-economy/farm-structure-...

I guess you can argue that a large closely held company isn't a family farm, but it isn't what "corporate" is meant to conjure up either.

Post reply on HN