Cities are the answer

Posted by tkstone 3 years, 1 month ago to Politics
36 comments | Share | Flag

I have posted several articles from this publication as negative examples, but I think this one puts forth an answer. the Federal government should stay out of life as much as possible as they are hard to escape from. The State to a lesser degree so they can have a little more power, but the city is very easy to move from. We should allow cities to "innovate" as much as they want as people can easily vote with their feet, in or out. The Gulch was a community with minimal rules. Something that appeals to the majority of those on this forum. Many think a more restrictive arrangement is desirable. If we could restrictive the political power to the local level we could prove our system. We all know the answer from the progressive is that they need bigger numbers to make their system work, but that is their problem. Unfortunately, it would require a laissez faire federal and state government to work. But it would give everyone the option they think is best and the opportunity to prove it.
SOURCE URL: http://www.governing.com/topics/politics/gov-states-cities-preemption-laws.html


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by Herb7734 3 years, 1 month ago
    No given form of a government under what the current understanding of what a government is, is the answer. Federal, state, or local, they all seek to curtail freedom to the degree the law allows and often beyond. If a properly formulated government that doesn't intrude on individual freedom any more than keeping the peace and protecting the citizens were to come into existence, then and only then, will you have the answer.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 3 years, 1 month ago
      I would agree, but add that individuals will differ on their view of keeping the peace and protecting property. That is where I believe cities can compete for individual preferences. Some want complete freedom while some will want certain protections. While I would prefer complete freedom others will want to experiment. I think like you that freedom is the answer, but there will always be those that think they have a better idea and this will provide a relatively safe mechanism to prove them wrong.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by Herb7734 3 years, 1 month ago
        It doesn't matter what people think, really. There is the truth, and then, there is everything else. Every argument that doesn't move toward freedom cannot be reconciled. That's exactly the problem we have today. However, we have gone so far down the path of compromise away from the original idea of what this republic was meant to be, that it's no longer a republic -- or anything else. It's a mixed-up mish-mash of laws, rules. and ideas, most of which are planted firmly in the realm of an altruistic sort of socialism that pays homage to freedom, but doesn't achieve it.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  MikeMarotta 3 years, 1 month ago
    Thanks! I agree 100%. One argument for federalism is that the states are 50 experiments. Let the cities be 100,000 experiments. These state laws preventing cities from passing certain laws are just as intrusive as would be federal laws. That they come from the states does not sanctify them.

    Moreover, as the article admits, cities (not states) are the engines of the economy. And that is not an accident - and it is historically validated. People who migrate to cities abandon their folkways and find new cultural norms. "Stadtluft macht frei" they said in German - City air makes you free. (A serf who could live a year and a day in a city was legally freed from his manor.

    As in the case of LGBT laws, cities have always been more "liberal"- expansive and innovative - than the countryside. In the Middle Ages, some cities even had women mayors. It was extra-legal (as was the rule of mayors in the first place, which led to Charlemagne, actually). While the manor was associated with a monastery, the cities were the sites of universities. Whereas the manor lord was a professional soldier, craftsmen have no time for that, so they used firearms.

    If a city raises the minimum wage or makes discriminating illegal, the consequences will be felt sooner, rather than later. That said, though, Austin has special sales taxes above the state imposts. It seems not to have affected business here.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by DrZarkov99 3 years, 1 month ago
      Oklahoma City has instituted an interesting program, voted on and approved by city residents. They added a half cent sales tax expressly restricted to improving the city infrastructure and adding features to attract business and tourists. That program is now into its third round (has to be approved by voters periodically), and has been extremely successful, renovating the downtown area, improving public transportation, and adding features like the whitewater experience on the river.

      Quite a few other cities have come to assess the effectiveness of the OKC program and see if it might be a model for them to adopt. That kind of innovation, accepted by the voters, seems to be the idea of independent city initiative in action.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by  $  Dobrien 3 years, 1 month ago
      'Many mayors work closely with the Obama admin
      on early childhood ed , green energy , community
      policing and my brothers keeper initiatives ment to
      boost African American and Hispanic men."In Pittsburg we are like an urban lab where they can be sent to grow" Pittsburg mayor Bill Peduto'

      Let's see early mind control Ed , inefficient energy, community policing ( WTF is that) my brothers program (statist collectivist racism at its worst-- See Ayn Rands essay on racism you tube)
      The lab in Pittsburg with that input will look like an orange covered with mold.

      In Minnesota the republican legislature is looking to pass a bill that requires a person to use the restroom or locker room or similar facilities based on their sex at birth .
      The Dem Governer Mark Dayton has promised to veto. Dayton worth hundreds of millions from inheritance ( Target Corp ) has never held a job outside of govt. 1st wife was a Rockafeller inheritor. Just the kind of guest Hank Reardon's wife would have invited to a party. A piece of $hip.
      He feels the wealthy should pay more in taxes except him, his family trust is held in (So.Dakota no state tax there ) a hypocrite.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  edweaver 3 years, 1 month ago
    I can mostly agree with you.

    One thing that is not taken into account is on a 51 to 49 vote it is possible to destroy the value of a person or businesses property so cities need to be held in check too. But it is still a whole lot better than out of control federal & state governments that we have now.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by DeanStriker 3 years, 1 month ago
      "out of control" equates to All governments regardless of levels, always.

      There is so much to be said for Private Property being a first absolute. Whatever "control" then is easily accomplished with Deed Restrictions.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  blarman 3 years, 1 month ago
    The problem is not the City or State or even Federal Government per se, but the responsiveness to and distance from the problems, which are all ultimately local. A "city" can range in size from tens of thousands to tens of millions. Just like in a business there is a huge difference in governing organizations of varying sizes.

    I think what you really need is compartmentalization of units. You have to start with a base unit of governance that is one home. That one should have preeminent control and infringements on its rights and powers should be only where absolutely necessary. Next would come a geographical neighborhood level of say 100-500 homes. Then you would have a regional grouping of those neighborhoods, but on a much smaller scale of management, maybe between 6 and 12 or so. That would put every grouping into "communities" of between 2500 to 25000 people. That's a sizeable enough amount to be meaningful, but not an impossible amount to accommodate for town hall meetings, elections, etc.

    In each case, as the levels go up they acquire less power rather than more, being granted power only where an aggregation of resources makes sense, such as for municipality services (power, water, etc.). Municipalities would then band together for mutual defense treaties, disaster relief and firefighting efforts, etc. I believe that this was the way the original Constitution was created: its aim was to assist the individual States in governance - not to take over. Sadly, it is the state of men that when some get a little power, it becomes an intoxicant and addiction and they seek only more.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by wiggys 3 years, 1 month ago
    cities are not the answer to anything, it is the dumb a++ people who are referred to as legislators that are the problem. like all civil servants they believe they are smarter than the rest of the population. all of this smartness happens instantly once they are elected. they are like all other civil servants the problem.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by wiggys 3 years, 1 month ago
      I should have added that i grew up in NYC and lived there for the first 31 years of my life. I left on my sail boat and was a live aboard for 13 months. I have been back a few times and found that it is basically a hell hole. Imagine having millions of dollars and living on Park Ave. Once you leave your apartment you become just another number on the street, easy picking for the bad guys. So you see it is not a good place to live. You get fat because you have all these restaurants to eat at and you get no exercise to boot.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by IamThereforeIThink 3 years, 1 month ago
    It would & should begin with a center/core - the what at this center should have three components:
    1. Moral code (Ayn Rand's Objectivism)
    2. Motive power (the ego as she identifies it)
    3. Motor unit (concretized expression of her philosophy)
    Up until a few years ago all this was theory and never actualized in totality. Mostly because #3. was not there - which is why you've seen various attempts at Atlantis collapse or vaporize in scandal.
    Start from here:
    www.GaltsGulchPortal.blogspot.ca
    and from there do your own Dagny/Hank homework
    & maybe we'll see you in June.

    JohnGalt Iamoura
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by DeanStriker 3 years, 1 month ago
      Sadly, defining and enacting Reason is nigh-on impossible. That's why man chooses to be GOVERNed... by whom?... Other men! Forfeit!
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by IamThereforeIThink 3 years, 1 month ago
        Interesting isn't it - evidently there's still that mental block, a protection more impenetrable than that 'ray screen'. Its like this creature didn't read a word I posted or get the image in the link.
        Anyone planning on making the trip in June - well, this preconceived improbable/impossible "forfeit" mentality is what you're leaving behind ... happily.

        JohnGalt Iamoura
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
  • Posted by  $  MichaelAarethun 3 years, 1 month ago
    Cities allow zero chance of self sufficiency and 100% chance of collectivity. The 'conveniences' are addictive as are the 'needs' for more government especially those of a security nature. the ability for any government to 'control' the population are much more readily http://available.as are the aggravations of being only one thin wall away from any sort of independent privacy. The needs to make it work mean you would have to carefully select who would be allowed in and and who would be forced out.The complete dependency on the outside for such staples as fresh air, fresh water, power, food and clothing, means of constructing shelter, argue against any sort of success except when the city also contains the means of controlling the outside areas as well. City-State with master-slave relationship.

    In the country give a family one hundred acres, a well, and a bag of seeds, some trees and a few tools and leave them alone unless they ask for help (barn and house raising days) country doctor, one is more likely to find a form of eutopia...stilll the need for and gravitation towards some form of power, medical aid, and social contact would need fulfillment. The need for groups to gather to build or make something needed still exist.

    The need for medical, police, judiciary, and military still exist.

    Laissez faire nous to complete the incomplete statement means leave me alone to make it or fail on my own. never forget nous at the end.

    Cities tend to subjugate the rest of a country by virtue of sheer numbers and tend to breed human pestilence and living garbage at a faster rate. Unless they are self correcting.

    One might use them as useful islands of convenience with the rest of the population spread out until the waning years but short of museums and symphonies they serve no other useful purpose except seats of government and centers of industrial production and a lot of votes. which means a balance would be required to the agrarian areas less laissez faire nous means Ok at a price. .

    Whatever balance is struck no matter how successful give it 200 years maximum. It's like the yen to buy a new car every three years....A very human failing .

    Eutopia meaning the place that can never exist is just that and one does not find it in towns larger, as suggested than 10,000. So....pass a law that excess population must move at least 100 miles down the freeway or off to each side and tie the whole thing together with a good transportation and distribution system?

    Like many I see cities as living death traps.....based on the natural law of human nature fortified by the support given to those who would not work but expect to eat. So requirement one is let them learn to work or let them die. thus the harsh realities of natural law provide the control while trying to fool mother nature breeds failure.



    .
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by term2 3 years, 1 month ago
    Unfortunately, those of us who are alive now will most likely never get to see a reduced federal government, or state government for that matter. There is too much money to be grabbed by the establishment with the current system. Look at the incredible pushback against Trump for his anti-establishment campaign to get a feeling for it.

    In my experience, the cities are very bad at curtailing day to day freedoms (local building codes, zoning, property restrictions, local police efforts )and a big chunk of money in sales taxes and property taxes, followed by the state (not so much in Nevada), and then the federal government for longer term freedom curtailment and large scale money stealing if your income is large.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by TheRealBill 3 years, 1 month ago
      We will see it. It won't be in America or even on this planet though.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by term2 3 years, 1 month ago
        I would feel a great sigh of relief not having to deal with the governments we have. I cringe when I get mail from ANY government. Its always bad news- I need to comply with something, or pay them money. I am so DONE with government at this point. Ready to shrug.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by rbunce 3 years, 1 month ago
    Living in a small municipality the tyranny of the majority is alive and well and the State Legislature which creates the State Chartered Municipal Corporations with very limited powers must perform oversight of their creations to prevent them from abusing their given powers and assuming new ones.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by DrZarkov99 3 years, 1 month ago
    I hate big cities, as I consider them to be rat warrens, teeming with all sorts of unpleasantness. The UN's Agenda 21 promotes the idea of collecting all of humanity in megacities of hundreds of millions population, supposedly to deliver services more efficiently and reduce our impact on the environment. They would be death traps, as pandemics spread much faster in dense populations, and even limited failures of transportation, power, water, sewer or garbage collection can have deadly impact. Criminal activity is much higher in densely populated centers.

    We need to transition to more widespread, smaller population centers, with distributed power, medical, and environmental services. That kind of social structure shortens the distance between community management and the people they serve, making them more answerable to their constituents. It also reduces the spread of pandemics, the impact of power failures, and the ability of criminals to hide in large populations.

    Large cities are an archaic construct, serving the needs of the powerful and creating an undesirable living environment. Well organized, full service distributed communities will be much more efficient, safer, and easier to manage, with individuals having a more direct say in how things are run.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  Temlakos 3 years, 1 month ago
    The original Platonic Republic was a collection of loosely allied city-states. And in a strictly defined republic, government at each level would function by vote of the representatives of the level below. Those levels would be: individual householder -> village (or suburb -> city) -> county -> State -> federal.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by DeanStriker 3 years, 1 month ago
      A '"republic" is naught but another version of force by government, perhaps sometimes, but rarely, protecting the rights of the "public individual".
      .
      Many years ago in college I was "forced" to buy and read "Plato's Republic". 'Twas so boring that I read only a short while before trashing the book, so I can't say whatever it might import.

      ONLY if each "level" of government as the levels are "upward" could be completely autonomous and exempt from the forceful edicts of "higher" levels might there be any hope for individual sovereignty. That's never happened, has it?
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by DrZarkov99 3 years, 1 month ago
      Plato specifically set the limit of his ideal city states at 10,000 occupants. He did that purposely to insure the leaders were easily identified and known to all the inhabitants.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by 3 years, 1 month ago
        I believe natural forces would probably keep cities in that range, but I could not support the idea of an outside imposed limit, and I don't think you are suggesting that either.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by DrZarkov99 3 years, 1 month ago
          Actually, Plato was suggesting just that - an imposed limit. Part of his reasoning is interesting, based on his observation that a human could pick out a stranger in a population no larger than 10,000, while bigger populations made it possible for an intruder to blend in with the crowd and "disappear." He didn't want people in his city states to become anonymous and lost in the crowd.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo