Support NeoGAF

[Maledict]

Right, but: former coal employees who are now unemployed or on lower wage jobs, communities that were dependent on coal workers as part of the demand for their goods and services, family and close friends of coal employees and former coal employees: definitely a lot more than 77,774.

Community matters. People are more than individuals.

Yay you're back!

Agree completely, and people miss this when they talk about how small the coal industry is. There are towns in Yorkshire that are *still* suffering calamitously from the closure of mining pits 30+ years ago. I'm not saying we bring that industry back, but often entire communities were built around it and when it goes everything collapses. Unless we're proposing to forceably move people around the country, there needs to be a plan for these single industry, blue collar towns when the industry goes.

 

[VistraNorrez]

Agree completely, and people miss this when they talk about how small the coal industry is. There are towns in Yorkshire that are *still* suffering calamitously from the closure of mining pits 30+ years ago. I'm not saying we bring that industry back, but often entire communities were built around it and when it goes everything collapses. Unless we're proposing to forceably move people around the country, there needs to be a plan for these single industry, blue collar towns when the industry goes.

I think when people talk about how small the coal industry is, it's in reference to the effects coal production has on the environment. Why does employing 75,000 people (in turn helping those communities) take precedent over the millions of people that would have their health impaired by environmental damage from that same coal. It's not just 75,000 jobs are no big deal, it's let's weigh their importance.

The thing is most of those 75,000 people (and their families) are also suffering from the same or even worse health conditions. Yet they still want that industry back.

I don't think any political party has a solid solution to helping those communities. Job training in related fields sounds great, but is different for each community it effects. It becomes hard to justify spending the time and money on that from the left and the right. And we know propping up the Coal industry will now work. It's becoming more expensive while alternatives are becoming cheaper. Yet the people this is actually effecting the employment of would rather it get saved than do something else. So even if there was a private sector solution, it would be hard to implement.

If there are still communities that have been suffering closures from closures 30 years back, the help they can receive is limited. But the worst thing they can hang their hat on is the return of the industry, which is what the Republicans are promising.

I think a place to start is free college/vocational education for the children of those regions. Allow them to gain skills outside of their towns that hopefully some of them bring back. Maybe give tax incentives to other industries to open up shop there? Invest in the future not the past.

 

[Maledict]

Oh, don't get me wrong - at no point do I think we bring coal back. Coal has been a disaster in terms of health and the environment. But we can't just end these things and expect everyone to magically find employment. Plus it ignores the community effect of those industries in these towns - the local pit *was* the community in many respects, and once it went the communities fell apart. Around Leeds, some of those old, white mining towns still have unemployment above 60% and massive heroin problems.

In the UK at least no-one is really talking about bringing coal back. thatcher killed that stone dead. But there has to be something we can do as a country and a society that goes beyond condemning those places to a slow, painful death. You guys are further behind where we are I think, but the end result will be the same.

 

[tuxfool]

In the UK at least no-one is really talking about bringing coal back. thatcher killed that stone dead. But there has to be something we can do as a country and a society that goes beyond condemning those places to a slow, painful death. You guys are further behind where we are I think, but the end result will be the same.

The problem is that those places often reject attempts to do just that. Such actions require those to actively buy-in to other options.

It is all fine to say what should/could be done in theory, but when the time comes to enable people willing to implement such proposals, the dying towns reject them.

 

[Maledict]

The problem is that those places often reject attempts to do just that. Such actions require those to actively buy-in to other options.

It is all fine to say what should/could be done in theory, but when the time comes to enable people willing to implement such proposals, the dying towns reject them.

I think we followed a slightly different path in the UK. The industry didn't die out of it's own accord, in a slow way like has happened in the USA. The government destroyed it, utterly, and didn't put anything into place to replace it. It was an act of cultural and class warfare to destroy a voting base of the opposition.

In the USA it's happened over a longer period of time, without the government deliberately doing it. And yes, they don't buy in to the government acts to help them, but that doesn't mean we abandon them surely? It's a really hard question, because on the other hand, why should we spend money helping a bunch of ignorant racists who prefer to live in isolation?

 

[tuxfool]

In the USA it's happened over a longer period of time, without the government deliberately doing it. And yes, they don't buy in to the government acts to help them, but that doesn't mean we abandon them surely? It's a really hard question, because on the other hand, why should we spend money helping a bunch of ignorant racists who prefer to live in isolation?

Yeah, it is a question of bandwidth. There is never enough time to do everything for everyone, so any politician inclined to help is going to have to balance the plight of these people with other communities more inclined to enable politicians to help them. If somebody fights tooth and nail to prevent you from helping them, are you really doing that?

 

[Plinko]

Trump is attacking leakers again this morning, no more than a week after it was reported that his own officials were leaking information to Nunes. You can't make this stuff up.

 

[royalan]

The problem is that those places often reject attempts to do just that. Such actions require those to actively buy-in to other options.

It is all fine to say what should/could be done in theory, but when the time comes to enable people willing to implement such proposals, the dying towns reject them.

Truth.

People need to not forget that Hillary Clinton had a plan for coal minors and the Appalachian communities that relied on that industry. A very comprehensive plan to subsidize those communities, and bring new industries to them. And at a town hall she gave a very eloquent answer about just this.

And Republicans spliced it into a damaging soundbite that they used to effectively run against her in those very states that would have been helped by what she was proposing.

The issue with Democrats winning those rural Americans is not the lack of a plan, because Republicans sure as fuck don't have one. And it isn't a lack of communicating that plan to that constituency, because we do. Democrats are consistently the only political party that does address bringing jobs and industry to rural America (and we need to do a better job of owning this).

The problem is two-fold: you have a group of people who desperately want to believe that their dying industries are still the beating heart of "AMERICAH!" and that all that needs to happen is the sidelining of fucking liberals with their goddamn regulations, and a political party that is fully and actively invested in making sure that they KEEP believing that because belief in that fiction grants them political power.

Democrats should never stop trying to talk to those voters. But I do think we need to understand that we're never going to reach them as long as Republicans are invested in keeping them deaf to our message. And again, it must be stated, Democrats have got to get more local, because it doesn't help that Republicans can fortify their message via every level of politics. Ds are shouting good policies, but we're doing it from Washington.

 

[Poodlestrike]

I think we followed a slightly different path in the UK. The industry didn't die out of it's own accord, in a slow way like has happened in the USA. The government destroyed it, utterly, and didn't put anything into place to replace it. It was an act of cultural and class warfare to destroy a voting base of the opposition.

In the USA it's happened over a longer period of time, without the government deliberately doing it. And yes, they don't buy in to the government acts to help them, but that doesn't mean we abandon them surely? It's a really hard question, because on the other hand, why should we spend money helping a bunch of ignorant racists who prefer to live in isolation?

I mean... you can't help somebody that doesn't want to be helped, especially if they vote specifically to avoid getting help. Fundamentally, I'm not sure that there's a way to solve this other than waiting until those dying towns are totally gone. I'd love to believe that there's a messaging campaign or charm offensive that could turn them around, but I just don't see it.

 

[AntraxSuicide]

Even if you want to help those places, it's not always possible at the federal level. States have a lot of power over themselves and what they do within their borders. A lot.

 

[BoogieWoogie]

Trump playing golf with Rand Paul today.

 

[Crimson_Gold]

Trump playing golf with Rand Paul today.

This is the end

 

[Surfinn]

Trump playing golf with Rand Paul today.

Mar-a-Lago?

 

[BoogieWoogie]

Mar-a-Lago?

Nah his VA resort.

Clear he's trying to negotiate healthcare but he doesn't know anything about the bill. No one's going to vote aye on this if they try to bring it to a vote again. He's just wasting his time with Paul.

 

[AntraxSuicide]

Nah his VA resort.

Clear he's trying to negotiate healthcare but he doesn't know anything about the bill. No one's going to vote aye on this if they try to bring it to a vote again. He's just wasting his time with Paul.

Yeah, Paul is a terrible target for this; his vote is pretty easy to get (add a rider that defunds something and you've got him). He needs to be reaching out to the FC; getting them on board would mean you can then threaten moderates (has a Tea Partier ever been primaried? Moderates have getting Cantor'd to fear).

 

[kess]

Hey, I just realized the people trying to stick a Trump flag on the reddit pixel thing would be the only example of an individual (and politician) in the entire mosaic.

 

[shadowsdarknes]

Purity test is code for "I don't think the issue you care about matters."

Sometimes that's true.

Other times, not so.

In the case of environmental issues, some people were not willing to get behind Clinton even after the primary because she didn't support an outright ban on fracking and wasn't Day 1 opposed to Keystone XL.

Compare that to Trump, and Clinton is clearly a better ally to the environment than Trump.
It's one thing not to be satisfied, and it's another thing to dismiss them both as bad for the environment and toss it up as a wash because they don't meet your threshold for environmental cleanliness.

 

[fantomena]

I have never said this, but last year someone from Russia logged into my Instagram account and all the pics in the "general pic feed" or whatever Im gonna call it was about Trump.

They never did anything to my account, they just wanted me to see pro-Trump pics.

 

[The Technomancer]

Christ people really bought the "dishonest Clinton" thing hook line and sinker. On Twitter just saw someone say "cause Clinton was really going to 'fight' for that $12 minimum wage right?"

 

[Surfinn]

Christ people really bought the "dishonest Clinton" thing hook line and sinker. On Twitter just saw someone say "cause Clinton was really going to 'fight' for that $12 minimum wage right?"

"They're both just as bad" "Clinton is worse" are two statements that instantly reveal how misinformed one is.

 

[Wilsongt]

Christ people really bought the "dishonest Clinton" thing hook line and sinker. On Twitter just saw someone say "cause Clinton was really going to 'fight' for that $12 minimum wage right?"

Did you also hear how she sold 20% of the US's uranium to Russia? That's a lot of money going into the Clinton Foundation coffers.

Guys! The next BERNIE SANDERS and JILL STEIN is here!!!

https://www.facebook.com/kennethmejiaforcongress/

 

[Carpe Libertatem]

Christ people really bought the "dishonest Clinton" thing hook line and sinker. On Twitter just saw someone say "cause Clinton was really going to 'fight' for that $12 minimum wage right?"

It's what millions of people have heard for the past 20 years, unfortunately

Even if it was clearly the Republican Party/the Right saying this, many Democrats/liberals still bought it! Sad, because this election proved that the GOP was right to do what they did.

 

[Surfinn]

Schiff on State of the Union:

"I would tell people, whenever they see the President use the word 'fake,' it ought to set off alarm bells."

“[Trump’s] tweets tell the story, and the story is ‘Look over there at leaks,’ and ‘Look over there at anything the Obama administration, we can claim, did wrong on incidental collection or anything else ― but whatever you do, under no circumstances look here at me or at Russia,’” Schiff continued. “I think that’s really what’s going on.”

Could he be more clear about there being damning evidence of collusion?

 

[Wilsongt]

Donald J. Trump‏ @realDonaldTrump

The real story turns out to be SURVEILLANCE and LEAKING! Find the leakers.
9:34 AM · Apr 2, 2017


And people attacked Obama for going after whistleblowers.

 

[BlastProcessing]

Right, but: former coal employees who are now unemployed or on lower wage jobs, communities that were dependent on coal workers as part of the demand for their goods and services, family and close friends of coal employees and former coal employees: definitely a lot more than 77,774.

Community matters. People are more than individuals.

The WaPo piece actually touches on that and acknowledges it. Did you read it? The article isn;t saying that coal is completely useless and it certainly isn't turning a blind eye to the plight of these communities. It is simply trying to reframe a debate that has become completely untethered from reality.

When I was young, I lived in a small town that was decimated because a Wal-Mart opened up 30 miles away. It collapsed the entire economy of the community in a little under 3 years. Main street fell apart. Then, there was a mass exodus that my family was actually a part of, but nobody really noticed or cared because retail doesn't have a romance to it.

The town finally started rebuilding itself decades later when a Prison was built there.

 

[Diablos]

RIP net neutrality

All because a fat orange wannabe fascist hates "fake" things

 

[Deleted member 231381]

The WaPo piece actually touches on that and acknowledges it. Did you read it? The article isn;t saying that coal is completely useless and it certainly isn't turning a blind eye to the plight of these communities. It is simply trying to reframe a debate that has become completely untethered from reality.

When I was young, I lived in a small town that was decimated because a Wal-Mart opened up 30 miles away. It collapsed the entire economy of the community in a little under 3 years. Main street fell apart. Then, there was a mass exodus that my family was actually a part of, but nobody really noticed or cared because retail doesn't have a romance to it.

The town finally started rebuilding itself decades later when a Prison was built there.

I wasn't responding to the article, I was responding to the person I quoted.

I do agree that there's too much emphasis placed on coal alone, and not enough on the other forms of job that have become defunct in past years - local high street shops is definitely one of them. You go to any high street now, and they all look the same - if they even exist.

I don't hear any Democrats coming up with any great ideas about what to do about it, though.

 

[ShadowSwordmaster]

The fact that Trump is trying to get the healthcare bill passed again shows how little he knows about the situation and it will only make it worse for him.

 

[BlastProcessing]

I wasn't responding to the article, I was responding to the person I quoted.

I do agree that there's too much emphasis placed on coal alone, and not enough on the other forms of job that have become defunct in past years - local high street shops is definitely one of them. You go to any high street now, and they all look the same - if they even exist.

I don't hear any Democrats coming up with any great ideas about what to do about it, though.

Agreed.

 

[AntraxSuicide]

I wasn't responding to the article, I was responding to the person I quoted.

I do agree that there's too much emphasis placed on coal alone, and not enough on the other forms of job that have become defunct in past years - local high street shops is definitely one of them. You go to any high street now, and they all look the same - if they even exist.

I don't hear any Democrats coming up with any great ideas about what to do about it, though.

You'd probably hear them come up with ideas over drinks but not publicly since the solutions are definitely political suicide. I don't know how you get the public talking about things like basic income without it being tied to the party (since that means we're just paying freeloaders like we always do).

Basically we need to get these places to bring it up and then we stand there and go "hey wow that's a great idea, can't believe we never thought of it, let's do it" and then whip out a (clearly pre-written) plan that we totally just came up with on the spot guyz.

 

[PBY]

Donald J. Trump‏ @realDonaldTrump

The real story turns out to be SURVEILLANCE and LEAKING! Find the leakers.
9:34 AM · Apr 2, 2017


And people attacked Obama for going after whistleblowers.

I mean, he did tho. 2 wrongs and all that.

 

[johnsmith]

Donald J. Trump‏ @realDonaldTrump

The real story turns out to be SURVEILLANCE and LEAKING! Find the leakers.
9:34 AM · Apr 2, 2017


And people attacked Obama for going after whistleblowers.

literally

 

[kirblar]

@tbonier
Interesting: in WI, MI, OH, PA, younger voters underperformed '12 turnout the most. In AZ, NV, CO, younger voters outperformed '12 the most.

This is good for the future, bad for right now.

 

[Carpe Libertatem]

You'd probably hear them come up with ideas over drinks but not publicly since the solutions are definitely political suicide. I don't know how you get the public talking about things like basic income without it being tied to the party (since that means we're just paying freeloaders like we always do).

Basically we need to get these places to bring it up and then we stand there and go "hey wow that's a great idea, can't believe we never thought of it, let's do it" and then whip out a (clearly pre-written) plan that we totally just came up with on the spot guyz.

I'll add "freeloaders" meaning nonwhite, of course.

Really need a solution that can be specific to these communities

 

[Diablos]

This is good for the future, bad for right now.

My question is... how long until the future is now?

 

[kirblar]

I wasn't responding to the article, I was responding to the person I quoted.

I do agree that there's too much emphasis placed on coal alone, and not enough on the other forms of job that have become defunct in past years - local high street shops is definitely one of them. You go to any high street now, and they all look the same - if they even exist.

I don't hear any Democrats coming up with any great ideas about what to do about it, though.

This is a broken windows fallacy. Putting people out of work because you can do it cheaper and more efficiently due to economies of scale doesn't mean you need it isn't a bad thing for society- it means they're freed up to do something else.

Food, Consumer Goods- these things are incredibly cheap and easily available now. All the heavy costs are now housing, transportation (cars) and medicine. It's a big change in the world and we're struggling to adapt to it, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't evolve. Wanting "all those small businesses back" is just another form of Nostalgia Glasses like MAGA.

 

[Bonen no Max'd]

I wasn't responding to the article, I was responding to the person I quoted.

I do agree that there's too much emphasis placed on coal alone, and not enough on the other forms of job that have become defunct in past years - local high street shops is definitely one of them. You go to any high street now, and they all look the same - if they even exist.

I don't hear any Democrats coming up with any great ideas about what to do about it, though.

*dons Matt Stoller hat*
break up big industries
nationalize airlines
turn Amazon into like 30 companies
*takes off Stoller hat*

This is a broken windows fallacy. Putting people out of work because you can do it cheaper and more efficiently due to economies of scale doesn't mean you need it isn't a bad thing for society- it means they're freed up to do something else.

Food, Consumer Goods- these things are incredibly cheap and easily available now. All the heavy costs are now housing, transportation (cars) and medicine. It's a big change in the world and we're struggling to adapt to it, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't evolve. Wanting "all those small businesses back" is just another form of Nostalgia Glasses like MAGA.

lol

Small businesses are important because they create local community power and agency and keep money in the community. People and communities aren't just cogs for you to move around to wherever you want.

 

[Y2Kev]

This doesn't explain to me how the polls were so close for the Republican primary though. Was it that the Republican base in general is more representative of uneducated, rural whites (clearly true)? Is it that they were more willing to speak out during the primary (maybe)? It's not like there was a social shaming problem there; Trump's polling performance was relatively predictive. I don't get it.

The other thing I was thinking about is whether or not the Democrats should moderate their message on abortion. It seems like people who feel very strongly about this issue almost always vote Republican but even voters who feel moderate about this issue probably are now also voting Republican. Is it possible to moderate messaging without changing the position on this?

Loss of the Catholic vote was interesting.

 

[Bonen no Max'd]

This doesn't explain to me how the polls were so close for the Republican primary though. Was it that the Republican base in general is more representative of uneducated, rural whites (clearly true)? Is it that they were more willing to speak out during the primary (maybe)? It's not like there was a social shaming problem there; Trump's polling performance was relatively predictive. I don't get it.

The other thing I was thinking about is whether or not the Democrats should moderate their message on abortion. It seems like people who feel very strongly about this issue almost always vote Republican but even voters who feel moderate about this issue probably are now also voting Republican. Is it possible to moderate messaging without changing the position on this?

Loss of the Catholic vote was interesting.

There could be some messaging in terms of "big social safety nets heavily reduce the number of abortions" but I think the better issue for this is guns. Our policies on guns are bad and won't fix any of the problems and the thing that would fix the problem (taking away all the guns) is too toxic for anyone to touch. Running on community investment and mental health would probably do more to stop gun violence than stuff like the assault weapon ban. I don't know how many votes it would get us, but if we want something to moderate on it should be something that we'll never actually do anything about.

 

[Carpe Libertatem]

There could be some messaging in terms of "big social safety nets heavily reduce the number of abortions" but I think the better issue for this is guns. Our policies on guns are bad and won't fix any of the problems and the thing that would fix the problem (taking away all the guns) is too toxic for anyone to touch. Running on community investment and mental health would probably do more to stop gun violence than stuff like the assault weapon ban. I don't know how many votes it would get us, but if we want something to moderate on it should be something that we'll never actually do anything about.

But urban voters, especially urban voters of color (aka base of the party), sort of want more gun control?

 

[BlastProcessing]

This is a broken windows fallacy. Putting people out of work because you can do it cheaper and more efficiently due to economies of scale doesn't mean you need it isn't a bad thing for society- it means they're freed up to do something else.

Food, Consumer Goods- these things are incredibly cheap and easily available now. All the heavy costs are now housing, transportation (cars) and medicine. It's a big change in the world and we're struggling to adapt to it, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't evolve. Wanting "all those small businesses back" is just another form of Nostalgia Glasses like MAGA.

No, this has nothing to do with broken windows. the windows never broke. The economy was disrupted in a way that the community could not bear. The only thing my parents where freed to do was to leave after they both lost their jobs on the exact same day. The community just died.

 

[kirblar]

lol

Small businesses are important because they create local community power and agency and keep money in the community. People and communities aren't just cogs for you to move around to wherever you want.

Communities are built around economic activity. If there is no reason for people to live somewhere, there will not be jobs there. If your coal mine closes, everyone should be moving.

This is the resource curse- economic power derives from trade between parties. When you derive your income from harvesting a natural resource that you had no input into creating, you're the economic equivalent of a trust fund kid who doesn't understand how to survive when they get cut off from their parents.

What we want to be doing is subsidizing people in ways that empower them to move on. What we don't want to do is subsidize towns that no longer have a reason to exist.

 

[Bonen no Max'd]

But urban voters, especially urban voters of color (aka base of the party), sort of want more gun control?

I mean, that's the issue here, but if we're going to cut something it should be the thing that we'll never actually do anything about. Spending lots of money on programs to reduce crime (not with police/prison, just jobs/money) would do a lot more to lower gun violence than any of the ideas we're suggesting. It's also not a highly ranked issue for most voter preferences, which is part of why the NRA is so effective.

I don't think we do moderate on it, though. It's an unpopular stance in the primary to have and I don't know if we need to. Just saying it's much better to moderate on that than abortion.

 

[kirblar]

No, this has nothing to do with broken windows. the windows never broke. The economy was disrupted in a way that the community could not bear. The only thing my parents where freed to do was to leave after they both lost their jobs on the exact same day. The community just died.

I see breaking up large businesses as a massive net negative (they're the windows being broken here) that will result in higher prices for consumer goods in a misguided effort to bring back jobs that aren't naturally supported in today's ecosystem for no reason other than nostalgia glasses.

 

[Poodlestrike]

There could be some messaging in terms of "big social safety nets heavily reduce the number of abortions" but I think the better issue for this is guns. Our policies on guns are bad and won't fix any of the problems and the thing that would fix the problem (taking away all the guns) is too toxic for anyone to touch. Running on community investment and mental health would probably do more to stop gun violence than stuff like the assault weapon ban. I don't know how many votes it would get us, but if we want something to moderate on it should be something that we'll never actually do anything about.

This is something I've been made to realize over the last 3 months of living and working in Fucking Nowhere, Indiana. For the people here, guns aren't just something they like on principle, they're an entire way of life. Guns are what they talk about, think about, spend huge amounts of their discretionary income on. Like 60% of the conversations I overhear are about gun history, gun buying, or gun shooting. It's like a community wide hobby/obsession. You cannot go after these peoples' guns and expect to be able to get their vote. Never gonna happen.

That's not to say that they won't agree that you need common sense gun control, but it's an incredibly tenuous sort of agreement. That figure people quote about the vast majority of Americans being in favor of stuff like universal background checks is CRAZY soft.

It's something we're just gonna have to give up on for now. Maybe if we can get power and hold on to it long enough to massively reform education and opportunity and these people get new nonlethal hobbies we can go back to it, but that's like waaaay down the road.

 

[BlastProcessing]

I see breaking up large businesses as a massive net negative (they're the windows being broken here) that will result in higher prices for consumer goods in a misguided effort to bring back jobs that aren't naturally supported in today's ecosystem for no reason other than nostalgia glasses.

Where did I call for the break up of large businesses?

I am having a hard time following you here. You have jumped from arguing that coal companies should go under to talking about Broken Windows to taking a stance against breaking up large businesses.

The only think you seem consistent about are these nebulous nostalgia glasses.

My point is that many factors can lead to the destabilization of a local economy. The media and politicians seem to disproportionately focus on a few of these factors. The goal of a government should be to identify and ease these destabilizing factors. Of course they can't and shouldn't 100% prevent our economy from changing, but guidance and planning is the best way for a government to help individual citizens affected and to insure the health of the larger economy.

You seem to be taking a more Malthusian position that people who get fucked over by large economic trends should just go ahead and unfuck themselves by their bootstraps.

 

[kirblar]

Where did I call for the break up of large businesses?

I am having a hard time following you here. You have jumped from arguing that coal companies should go under to talking about Broken Windows to taking a stance against breaking up large businesses.

The only think you seem consistent about are these nebulous nostalgia glasses.

My point is that many factors can lead to the destabilization of a local economy. The media and politicians seem to disproportionately focus on a few of these factors. The goal of a government should be to identify and ease these destabilizing factors. Of course they can't and shouldn't 100% prevent our economy from changing, but guidance and planning is the best way for a government to help individual citizens affected and to insure the health of the larger economy.

You seem to be taking a more Malthusian position that people who get fucked over by large economic trends should just go ahead and unfuck themselves by their bootstraps.

The post you were responding to was my response to Crab's post. Not one you wrote. Do you not know what a "Broken Window Fallacy" is? That might explain the disconnect. (It's not the Broken Windows policy of Giuliani-era NYC)

I'm taking the position that we should absolutely help these people. But helping them does not mean that we have to prop up towns and industries that we no longer have a need for.

 

[AntraxSuicide]

I'll add "freeloaders" meaning nonwhite, of course.

Really need a solution that can be specific to these communities

The only solution I buy is UBI. In a service economy, these towns have literally no reason to exist. Bumfuck, Rural State has nothing but its few citizens, and there aren't enough of them to prop up a service economy. Arguing that we'll find them jobs is honestly a blatant lie (including the "we'll switch you to a clean energy job" line, there aren't enough of those either).

It is a reality in a short period of time there will only be a need for like 80% (or less) of the population to fill the workforce, and those jobs will almost all be in metro areas. The only way to keep the people of Bumfuck from starving will be to just pay them anyway for existing, but I don't know how to get anywhere near that politically.

 

[BlastProcessing]

The post you were responding to was my response to Crab's post. Not one you wrote. Do you not know what a "Broken Windows Fallacy" is? That might explain the disconnect.

I'm taking the position that we should absolutely help these people. But helping them does not mean that we have to prop up towns and industries that we no longer have a need for.

I do know the Broken Windows Fallacy and I simply don't think it applies. I am talking about the entire undermining of a town's entire ecosystem, not the fact that a window company gets a few bucks.

I also have a problem with the framing of helping a community as propping it up, as if propping something up is a bad thing. Everything we do is propping something up! It's all temporary. It's all a hack. It's all a stall. There is no perfect economic endgame. There is only us, a group of people who have formed a collective to try to stave off entropy and make the best of our time. We need to try to do the best we can with what we have. The theoretical, while important, only takes us so far.

 

[kirblar]

I do know the Broken Windows Fallacy and I simply don't think it applies. I am talking about the entire undermining of a town's entire ecosystem, not the fact that a window company gets a few bucks.

I also have a problem with the framing of helping a community as propping it up, as if propping something up is a bad thing. Everything we do is propping something up! It's all temporary. It's all a hack. It's all a stall. There is no perfect economic endgame. There is only us, a group of people who have formed a collective to try to stave off entropy and make the best of our time. We need to try to do the best we can with what we have. The theoretical, while important, only takes us so far.

It applies to the fact that in order to prop up small businesses that have been displaced by hyper-efficient big box stores, you have to break up/dismantle those operations, which is a big net negative to consumers. You're creating "work" by destroying efficient machines.

Propping these places up is a bad thing because these places make people racist. That's the trick to all of this - the root cause of why these patterns keep reoccuring is the geography. When people grow up in small isolated homogeneous towns, it causes them develop a pattern of behavior that's absolutely awful. To move forward on social/economic progress, we have to let these places go. We can't be subsidizing people's attempts to cling to a world now gone. I'm not saying don't help- I'm saying we give them what they (and we) need, not what they want.