Sunday, June 26, 2005

City folk be carrying you!

So the BIL is taking me to task:
I've noticed an inevitable Fed-hating theme lately, please post these facts to your blog:

1. A Federal system of government is one in which the central govenment is weak and power is dispersed to the slack-jawed yokels. They feature largely in counties of large geographical area but also in Germany (because the US played the largest role in fixing it up post war, hence the FRG).

2. city folk be carrying you!


And here's the link to a report on federal spending capita per state, showing that Utah, for instance, gets $1.19 for every $1.00 paid in taxes, while California gets $0.78.

I say: All the better reason for you to support stronger regionalization. I'm not "fed-hating" as put it. I want to see the scale of responsibilities revised. I want to see regional economic self-reliance to reduce everyone's vulnerability to natural and man-made (economic, political, social) disasters. I want to not depend on getting lettuce from the Central Valley, and I want to have electricity that I use generated near where I live, so that the money spent on it stays within the regional economy to benefit my community and encourage stronger regional relationships.

I do not want to be disconnected from the national grid - in case of emergency or unforeseen need, that backup is useful. But it should be just that: a backup, or redundant, source. Same with all the other basics of life: food, shelter, textiles, etc. The vision is that trade, of which tourism is one kind, brings in things that certainly enhance our quality of life (coffee comes immediately to mind), but don't necessarily make or break our existence.

The whole idea is not black and white like you seem to want me to make it out to be - it's an adjustment of scale.

And based on your definition, we don't reside in a "federal" system of government, because the local/state/regional proportion of control and power is much weaker than that of the federal, particularly in the intermountain west. Over 60% of the land in Utah is federal. I never would have said this before moving out here 10 years ago, but after living in this kind of dynamic, my simplistic views on the conflicts between and roles of local and federal authority have definitely changed. I certainly don't trust local politics for all the answers, but the local process has merit.

2 Comments:

At Wed Jun 29, 01:48:00 AM, Anonymous said...

I suppose I should have said relatively weak. In many democracies the next political division after the national government is the county and they barely have the power to issue parking tickets. Here the line of debate has always been drawn differently and it's a line we draw through Vietnam and Watergate, under the Reagan presidency and connect to all our current ills.

I know I like to paint you as the Ruby Ridge straw man and things are much more nuanced; as far as economics goes, if the government would simply stop picking up the tab for the real costs of shipping goods from five states or two continents away, they would be reflected in the price and the problem would solve itself.

Politically, I know practically local control is valuable, but a lot of things should have less local control. The idea of states regulating their own medicare or driving code is pretty ludicrous.

L'état, c'est moi

 
At Mon Jul 04, 11:28:00 AM, David Everitt said...

Fair enough - though, it should be pointed out, counties levy taxes just like states and the federal government. Unlike states and the feds, they provide, (beyond parking tickets) some other minor services like libraries, road maintenance, and water and sewer service.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home