Things that are lost with "Progress" and "Federal Government"

When it just doesn't fit anywhere else.
Post Reply
Ernie

Things that are lost with "Progress" and "Federal Government"

Post by Ernie »

I found this article interesting...
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/ ... out-485107
In particular the opposition to canals and railroads in the 1800's.
"It was a position echoed by Monroe, who vetoed plans to erect tolls on a national highway, and Andrew Jackson, who famously vetoed funding for the Maysville Road in 1830. All three presidents professed support for internal improvements, but only if they were principally financed by state and local governments, or by chartered corporations.

But opponents of federal funding for internal improvements feared more than just an empowered federal state. They understood that internal improvements would usher in a new reality—one in which a cherished agrarian republic gave way to a mixed economy of farms and small towns, factories and cities, agriculture and commerce. In a short story published in 1843, Nathaniel Hawthorne, a steadfast Jacksonian Democrat in politics, likened the railroad to “a sort of mechanical demon that would hurry us to the infernal regions.”

In North Carolina, opponents of state funding for internal improvements popularized an election ballad that framed canals and roads as the ruin of their agrarian paradise:

So therefore let it be our care,
To keep these men away from there,
Who build their castles in the air,
Who dream they can vast things perform,
Aid in a breadth God’s works reform,
[But to] us send such men as will
Cut no canals through vale nor hill.

In the eyes of opponents, where canals and railroads cut a swath through the countryside, they seemed to decimate local communities and turn once healthy, independent farmers into washed-out wage laborers. A New York editor invited readers to gaze on the “sallow complexions, emaciated forms, and stooping shoulders” of mill workers and consider what a “crime against society” it was to “divert human industry from the fields and the forests to the iron forges and cotton factories.”
0 x
Ken
Posts: 21863
Joined: Thu Jun 13, 2019 12:02 am
Location: Washington State
Affiliation: former MCUSA

Re: Things that are lost with "Progress" and "Federal Government"

Post by Ken »

Some things never change I guess.

On the other hand, it is a really big country and if you want to live without major highways, railroads, internet, airports, water projects, and other Federal infrastructure investments then there are plenty of corners of the country you can move to where you'll not be bothered by any of those things. And can live the life of a yeoman farmer unmolested by any Federal "improvements"

I do sometimes wonder if middle class authors like Nathaniel Hawthorne who glorify such things actually ever lived the life of a rural farmer. It isn't usually that glamorous.
0 x
A fool can throw out more questions than a wise man can answer. -RZehr
Szdfan

Re: Things that are lost with "Progress" and "Federal Government"

Post by Szdfan »

Ken wrote: ↑Sat May 01, 2021 9:58 pm I do sometimes wonder if middle class authors like Nathaniel Hawthorne who glorify such things actually ever lived the life of a rural farmer. It isn't usually that glamorous.
Jefferson also idealized country life, but Monticello isn’t exactly a typical farm either.

There are always winners and losers with change.
0 x
Ken
Posts: 21863
Joined: Thu Jun 13, 2019 12:02 am
Location: Washington State
Affiliation: former MCUSA

Re: Things that are lost with "Progress" and "Federal Government"

Post by Ken »

Szdfan wrote: ↑Sat May 01, 2021 10:43 pm
Ken wrote: ↑Sat May 01, 2021 9:58 pm I do sometimes wonder if middle class authors like Nathaniel Hawthorne who glorify such things actually ever lived the life of a rural farmer. It isn't usually that glamorous.
Jefferson also idealized country life, but Monticello isn’t exactly a typical farm either.

There are always winners and losers with change.
The whole history of America is basically young people moving off farms, to the towns and cities, to the military, to any option available to get them away. That was the industrial revolution in the 19th Century. And the story of the 20th Century with mechanization. And it continues today. The midwest and plains states are full of aging farmers with no one to hand the farm down to because the kids are all long gone and not coming back. A lot of rural America is emptier now than in over 100 years.

It's not railroads and highways and Federal investment that is causing that to happen.
0 x
A fool can throw out more questions than a wise man can answer. -RZehr
Ernie

Re: Things that are lost with "Progress" and "Federal Government"

Post by Ernie »

Ken wrote: ↑Sun May 02, 2021 12:15 amIt's not railroads and highways and Federal investment that is causing that to happen.
But without railroads and highways, it would have take a lot longer for this to happen.
1 x
User avatar
Robert
Site Janitor
Posts: 12078
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 4:16 pm
Affiliation: Anabaptist

Re: Things that are lost with "Progress" and "Federal Government"

Post by Robert »

There is a need for some federalism. I would say Interstate highways are a good thing, but they could have been done with much more state control or involvement. The way it was done was good, but not saying it was the best. People in DC do not know what it takes to make a road through the Ozarks, or the Arizona desert. While the Federal Government (FG) does use compaines that know these things, why would stop each state from doing the same thing? Then Arkansas could allocate the funds needed for mountain interstates and Arizona allocate the funds needed for desert roads. The FG would coordinate and organize the entire projects. Then if a state did not want the roads, they would be the ones who suffer from lack of interstate travel.

Eisenhower warned about the industrial military complex but then helped grow the FG industrial complex. Interesting.

The FG should tax the states and the states tax the people. The FG should not tax the people. I think it goes against the 10th Amendment.
1 x
Try hard not to offend. Try harder not to be offended.
I think I am funnier than I really am.
temporal1

Re: Things that are lost with "Progress" and "Federal Government"

Post by temporal1 »

“The thing is” .. :?

Infrastructure is not about providing for personal conveniences and pleasures of the masses. :-|

It’s about providing for industry that pays taxes and builds wealth of - the government.
It’s about providing for defense of nations+governments, their borders and military interests.

Think about the Roman roads.

The U.S. railroads expanded due to the U.S. Civil War.

- - -

Today ..
i sure wonder about “why” the State of Illinois bothers at all with dreams of improved infrastructure. promises, promises.
FOR WHAT?? welfare recipients? Social Security? to help out of state abortion seekers find their way?

https://worldpopulationreview.com/state ... s-by-state

without first plans - and indication of LOTS of business+industry, what is the point? (other than buying votes.)

God’s will.
If+when God decides to pull the plug on “the power grid,” which He could, at any moment, life will quickly return to ..
early Roman road days? .. something close to that.

Humans have not changed. Electricity is the central change. Remove electricity, it’s back to basics.
0 x
Ken
Posts: 21863
Joined: Thu Jun 13, 2019 12:02 am
Location: Washington State
Affiliation: former MCUSA

Re: Things that are lost with "Progress" and "Federal Government"

Post by Ken »

Ernie wrote: ↑Sun May 02, 2021 7:34 am
Ken wrote: ↑Sun May 02, 2021 12:15 amIt's not railroads and highways and Federal investment that is causing that to happen.
But without railroads and highways, it would have take a lot longer for this to happen.
Not really.

The cities will always be the economic engine and draw that they have always been. Infrastructure like highways and railroads tend more to benefit rural areas and make them viable. Without infrastructure to get goods to market, the agricultural economy vanishes.

In Texas, rural highways are actually called "Farm to Market" roads or "FM" roads. We lived off FM2490 near Waco for a spell.
0 x
A fool can throw out more questions than a wise man can answer. -RZehr
Ken
Posts: 21863
Joined: Thu Jun 13, 2019 12:02 am
Location: Washington State
Affiliation: former MCUSA

Re: Things that are lost with "Progress" and "Federal Government"

Post by Ken »

Robert wrote: ↑Sun May 02, 2021 8:21 am There is a need for some federalism. I would say Interstate highways are a good thing, but they could have been done with much more state control or involvement. The way it was done was good, but not saying it was the best. People in DC do not know what it takes to make a road through the Ozarks, or the Arizona desert. While the Federal Government (FG) does use compaines that know these things, why would stop each state from doing the same thing? Then Arkansas could allocate the funds needed for mountain interstates and Arizona allocate the funds needed for desert roads. The FG would coordinate and organize the entire projects. Then if a state did not want the roads, they would be the ones who suffer from lack of interstate travel.

Eisenhower warned about the industrial military complex but then helped grow the FG industrial complex. Interesting.

The FG should tax the states and the states tax the people. The FG should not tax the people. I think it goes against the 10th Amendment.
Without Federal involvement and funding there would not be interstates crossing states like Wyoming and Montana. Those states could not begin to pay for them on their own. Federal taxes raised in more populous states are what pays for them. But the actual building and maintaining them is the responsibility of state and local transportation departments. There is no Federal highway department that builds and maintains highways on its own. Just like there are no Federal troopers patrolling traffic on interstate highways either.
0 x
A fool can throw out more questions than a wise man can answer. -RZehr
temporal1

Re: Things that are lost with "Progress" and "Federal Government"

Post by temporal1 »

The idiom phrase 'an army marches on its stomach' means that soldiers, workers, or anyone else expected to perform a task cannot function effectively unless they are well fed.

Just as the military must be fed, so must urban areas.
In times of famines and plagues, due to dense populations, cities have logically suffered.

Presently, in Illinois, my sense is, the Democratic Machine in Chicago reads county voting maps just like you+me, they see they have no support outside their bounds, and policies reflect their lack of interest. Chicago politicians have no incentive to see the state thrive.

Cities cannot exist without food and other supportive goods+services. It’s never been any different.

Illinois was formerly a good place to be to find honest work, get an education, raise families, worship at numbers of churches.
It was known for its midwest work ethic.

i’m not sure of its future. i have no faith in Chicago politicians to lead to better times. they seem intent on destruction.

i see turkey buzzards landing to feed on grounds of abandoned light industry areas.
i read about Chicago youth killing each other.

drugs. abortion. welfare. gambling. “are we having fun yet?”
0 x
Post Reply