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

[Ken]

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?”

I don't pay much attention to Illinois but it took me about 30 seconds to determine that you are exactly wrong. Southern Illinois is hugely subsidized and receives a far greater share of tax revenues relative to what it contributes to the state economy compared to the Chicago area, and especially the Chicago area suburbs. It is the blue urban areas in Illinois that are subsidizing the red rural areas. And it is the red rural areas that are the economic drag on the state:

https://news.siu.edu/2018/08/081018-res ... nstate.php

[temporal1]

“exactly wrong.”

1. Your source is an arm of Chicago politics, a state university. A Chicago satellite. Such reports are not news to me.

2. Evidently, you judge “thriving” by gov pay outs, when the working people want JOBS, to pay their way.
Keeping folks dependent is a power game libs know well and love. No matter good intentions, it’s unhealthy.

[Ken]

“exactly wrong.”

1. Your source is an arm of Chicago politics, a state university. A Chicago satellite. Such reports are not news to me.

2. Evidently, you judge “thriving” by gov pay outs, when the working people want JOBS, to pay their way.
Keeping folks dependent is a power game libs know well and love. No matter good intentions, it’s unhealthy.

Southern Illinois University, headquartered in Carbondale in the southern corner of the state is a Chicago Satellite? I expect they would be surprised to learn that.

The point is that Illinois is not much different from the rest of the country. The urban and suburban areas subsidize the rural areas. Take away these subsidizes which pay for things like schools, roads, hospitals and so forth and you'd have even less jobs in rural southern Illinois and even more young people would be leaving.

Getting back to the original point of this thread. Infrastructure is what makes rural economies viable. And it is a lot more expensive to provide in rural areas than urban ones. Roads, electricity, water, sewer, internet, postal service, school bus service, ambulance service, etc. etc. It is all a LOT more expensive to provide on a per-capita basis when houses are spread out in rural areas rather than close together in urban ones.

[temporal1]

“exactly wrong.”

1. Your source is an arm of Chicago politics, a state university. A Chicago satellite. Such reports are not news to me.

2. Evidently, you judge “thriving” by gov pay outs, when the working people want JOBS, to pay their way.
Keeping folks dependent is a power game libs know well and love. No matter good intentions, it’s unhealthy.

Southern Illinois University, headquartered in Carbondale in the southern corner of the state is a Chicago Satellite? I expect they would be surprised to learn that.

The point is that Illinois is not much different from the rest of the country. The urban and suburban areas subsidize the rural areas. Take away these subsidizes which pay for things like schools, roads, hospitals and so forth and you'd have even less jobs in rural southern Illinois and even more young people would be leaving.

Getting back to the original point of this thread. Infrastructure is what makes rural economies viable. And it is a lot more expensive to provide in rural areas than urban ones. Roads, electricity, water, sewer, internet, postal service, school bus service, ambulance service, etc. etc. It is all a LOT more expensive to provide on a per-capita basis when houses are spread out in rural areas rather than close together in urban ones.

you may be correct about SIU being separate. i thought all Illinois state colleges/universities were part of the University of Illinois system. i’ll have to learn more about how that’s not the case. i think that would be great news.

my son graduated from SIU, he was there for 2 years, did well, unfortunately, that landed him in Seattle at Boeing.
we thought it was a dream at the time. be careful what you wish for.

in my life i’ve seen Illinois go from being a pretty good, reliable place to find work and education, to now being pretty much a welfare state. bad political policies gutted jobs. it’s sad. i’m not saying the same or worse has not happened elsewhere. i’m saying it’s a shame.

expensive infrastructure has ALWAYS in history been about serving government goals. the Roman roads were not built to accommodate peasants and farmers. but they changed everyone’s lives. as the OP is suggesting, not always for the better.

[Josh]

In the thread, a wealthy urbanite lectures someone who actually lives in rural Illinois, “ACKSHULLY this is how things really work”, apparently utterly ignorant of Chicago machine politics.

[ohio jones]

you may be correct about SIU being separate. i thought all Illinois state colleges/universities were part of the University of Illinois system. i’ll have to learn more about how that’s not the case. i think that would be great news.

The UI system includes only the UIUC, UIC, and Springfield campuses. SIU is separate, as are Illinois State, Chicago State, Governors State, and Eastern, Northern, Northeastern, and Western Illinois Universities. All are state supported (thus more directly affected by Springfield politics than Chicago politics, not that the two are always distinct), but separately governed and not part of the UI system. And then there's the Illinois Community College System.
-- a not-so-wealthy non-urbanite who has a degree from one of the above

[temporal1]

you may be correct about SIU being separate. i thought all Illinois state colleges/universities were part of the University of Illinois system. i’ll have to learn more about how that’s not the case. i think that would be great news.

The UI system includes only the UIUC, UIC, and Springfield campuses. SIU is separate, as are Illinois State, Chicago State, Governors State, and Eastern, Northern, Northeastern, and Western Illinois Universities. All are state supported (thus more directly affected by Springfield politics than Chicago politics, not that the two are always distinct), but separately governed and not part of the UI system. And then there's the Illinois Community College System.
-- a not-so-wealthy non-urbanite who has a degree from one of the above.

yes. that’s a good description of what i found but did not before know. thank you.
i grew up on the doorstep of one of the above, i helped a few close family members get thru, my son went to NIU then SIU, still, i did not catch the distinction.

All are state supported (thus more directly affected by Springfield politics than Chicago politics, not that the two are always distinct),

i think many of us are resigned to thinking in terms of the State of Chicago. it feels pretty well “over” now.

our local Community College is a prep school for our local Chicago satellite campus.

btw.
the campus is looking very nice these days, i had to drive through over the weekend. poor Col Wolfe school is neglected. i’m not sure what its future is. i presume demolition.

i was impressed at our son’s graduation. he graduated in December. it was a nice ceremony. the graduates and their families reflected hard working folks there for the purpose of education. a lot of sacrifice represented there that day. i also notice lots of SIU graduates employed at the local university. again, giving the impression SIU is an employment focused school. (SIU had a reputation for being a big party school for years.) i’m not sure that continues. i didn’t see it. our son surprised us by graduating a semester early - while washing dishes for a local restaurant all through. i doubt he had any social life.

[Ken]

In the thread, a wealthy urbanite lectures someone who actually lives in rural Illinois, “ACKSHULLY this is how things really work”, apparently utterly ignorant of Chicago machine politics.

Josh:

Perhaps you can explain how life in Southern Illinois is dramatically different from life across the state line in Southern Indiana because of Chicago "machine politics" and because Illinois has Democratic governors and senators and state legislature while they are all Republicans in Indiana. Illinois is obviously a blue state and Indiana is obviously a red state. So rural life must be dramatically different right?

Are the tax rates dramatically different? Let's see:

Illinois has a flat income tax of 4.95% with no local income tax. https://smartasset.com/taxes/illinois-tax-calculator
Indiana has a flat income tax of $3.23% but average local income taxes of 1.75% for a total income tax of 4.98% https://smartasset.com/taxes/indiana-tax-calculator essentially identical.

Illinois has a sales tax of 6.25% and Indiana has a sales tax of 7% so a bit lower in Illinois. Localities in IL can impose additional sales tax but many rural ones do not. So higher sales taxes in say Chicago do not affect southern IL.

Comparing two adjacent counties in southern Illinois and Indiana. Lawrence County in southern Illinois has a property tax rate of 1.33% and adjacent Knox County in Indiana has a property tax rate of 0.79% so edge to Indiana there. But property taxes are entirely local so are paying for local schools, fire, roads, etc. and nothing under the control of the state. These are all local taxes voted on my local citizens not Chicago. And both states have homestead exemptions, ag exemptions, and senior citizen exemptions so in the end the difference is pretty marginal.

Are laws and regulations different between the two states? Are Illinois farmers under the oppressive yoke of state regulations while Indiana farmers are not? Just how is Chicago "machine politics" affecting rural life in Southern Illinois? Other than subsidizing it. I'm really curious.

[Josh]

In the thread, a wealthy urbanite lectures someone who actually lives in rural Illinois, “ACKSHULLY this is how things really work”, apparently utterly ignorant of Chicago machine politics.

Josh:

Perhaps you can explain how life in Southern Illinois is dramatically different from life across the state line in Southern Indiana because of Chicago "machine politics" and because Illinois has Democratic governors and senators and state legislature while they are all Republicans in Indiana. Illinois is obviously a blue state and Indiana is obviously a red state. So rural life must be dramatically different right?

Are the tax rates dramatically different? Let's see:

Illinois has a flat income tax of 4.95% with no local income tax. https://smartasset.com/taxes/illinois-tax-calculator
Indiana has a flat income tax of $3.23% but average local income taxes of 1.75% for a total income tax of 4.98% https://smartasset.com/taxes/indiana-tax-calculator essentially identical.

Illinois has a sales tax of 6.25% and Indiana has a sales tax of 7% so a bit lower in Illinois. Localities in IL can impose additional sales tax but many rural ones do not. So higher sales taxes in say Chicago do not affect southern IL.

Comparing two adjacent counties in southern Illinois and Indiana. Lawrence County in southern Illinois has a property tax rate of 1.33% and adjacent Knox County in Indiana has a property tax rate of 0.79% so edge to Indiana there. But property taxes are entirely local so are paying for local schools, fire, roads, etc. and nothing under the control of the state. These are all local taxes voted on my local citizens not Chicago. And both states have homestead exemptions, ag exemptions, and senior citizen exemptions so in the end the difference is pretty marginal.

Are laws and regulations different between the two states? Are Illinois farmers under the oppressive yoke of state regulations while Indiana farmers are not? Just how is Chicago "machine politics" affecting rural life in Southern Illinois? Other than subsidizing it. I'm really curious.

You seem to have mistaken me for a Republican who wants to prattle on about lowering taxes.

[Ken]

In the thread, a wealthy urbanite lectures someone who actually lives in rural Illinois, “ACKSHULLY this is how things really work”, apparently utterly ignorant of Chicago machine politics.

Josh:

Perhaps you can explain how life in Southern Illinois is dramatically different from life across the state line in Southern Indiana because of Chicago "machine politics" and because Illinois has Democratic governors and senators and state legislature while they are all Republicans in Indiana. Illinois is obviously a blue state and Indiana is obviously a red state. So rural life must be dramatically different right?

Are the tax rates dramatically different? Let's see:

Illinois has a flat income tax of 4.95% with no local income tax. https://smartasset.com/taxes/illinois-tax-calculator
Indiana has a flat income tax of $3.23% but average local income taxes of 1.75% for a total income tax of 4.98% https://smartasset.com/taxes/indiana-tax-calculator essentially identical.

Illinois has a sales tax of 6.25% and Indiana has a sales tax of 7% so a bit lower in Illinois. Localities in IL can impose additional sales tax but many rural ones do not. So higher sales taxes in say Chicago do not affect southern IL.

Comparing two adjacent counties in southern Illinois and Indiana. Lawrence County in southern Illinois has a property tax rate of 1.33% and adjacent Knox County in Indiana has a property tax rate of 0.79% so edge to Indiana there. But property taxes are entirely local so are paying for local schools, fire, roads, etc. and nothing under the control of the state. These are all local taxes voted on my local citizens not Chicago. And both states have homestead exemptions, ag exemptions, and senior citizen exemptions so in the end the difference is pretty marginal.

Are laws and regulations different between the two states? Are Illinois farmers under the oppressive yoke of state regulations while Indiana farmers are not? Just how is Chicago "machine politics" affecting rural life in Southern Illinois? Other than subsidizing it. I'm really curious.

You seem to have mistaken me for a Republican who wants to prattle on about lowering taxes.

No, I'm just curious how Chicago "machine politics" affects life in rural southern Illinois and what make rural life in Illinois different from rural life in other nearby states like Indiana or Missouri. That is what Temporal1 was claiming.