Errorist76 said:
irstupid said:
It's not by land mass, but by demographics. The rural areas or small cities want completely different things than the big urban cities.
Take video games since we are on this site. How would you like it if every time a publisher was to make a new game they would send out a poll to the masses on what type of game it should be. There are more FPS fans than any other, so every single game from every publisher is a fps game. Or how about when the Wii was released and they did a poll. The masses would have voted that they want every single game made to be motion controlled cause WIi Sports was fun. Would us forum dwellers on this site like that? We got outvoted, so we can't complain right. Democracy.
It's the same for those non big city places. The governors/senators/ect are making laws that benefit or help the people in the city and either are detrimental to other people or ignore them completely. They wouldn't care about the rural areas cause the number of voters there is insignificant to the big city.
Mob rule is never good rule.
|
I see...I think I understand the situation...over here we even have city states in some cases. What I ask myself is..aren’t those urban areas usually also home to more industry and other tax heavy companies?! Wouldn’t the whole idea backfire eventually?! What exactly do they want to become instead?! Another republican Utah?!
|
Was just explaining reasoning for having electoral college or not mob rule.
But I would guess they would have lower taxes and thus entice those business to move to their new state. I mean lower taxes is why the big companies lots of times have money overseas. Look at Apple. All of it's money is overseas
I don't have a clue if breaking apart like this would be beneficial revenue/tax wise for this "new California" I would figure their revenue in taxes would take a huge hit, but I could also see their liabilities in social services also take a huge drop. So it could even out in the end.