0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Do additional counties in western KS cost more money for the people who live in eastern KS? I don't understand why someone in JoCo would care how many counties there are west of Wichita. The only people paying for that extra government are the people who live there, right?
Right now the west counties are trying like crazy to fund their schools with east county taxes. So, that is probably why.
Quote from: CNS on February 20, 2015, 10:19:03 AMRight now the west counties are trying like crazy to fund their schools with east county taxes. So, that is probably why.That isn't really true.
Quote from: Rage Against the McKee on February 20, 2015, 10:20:17 AMQuote from: CNS on February 20, 2015, 10:19:03 AMRight now the west counties are trying like crazy to fund their schools with east county taxes. So, that is probably why.That isn't really true.Interesting if true.
Quote from: CNS on February 20, 2015, 10:27:59 AMQuote from: Rage Against the McKee on February 20, 2015, 10:20:17 AMQuote from: CNS on February 20, 2015, 10:19:03 AMRight now the west counties are trying like crazy to fund their schools with east county taxes. So, that is probably why.That isn't really true.Interesting if true.Agriculture accounts for about 37% of the state's total economy. Most of the agricultural production is in western KS. Only 11% of the population lives in western KS. Most of the state's oil and gas exploration is also in western KS . . .
Quote from: Rage Against the McKee on February 20, 2015, 10:32:49 AMQuote from: CNS on February 20, 2015, 10:27:59 AMQuote from: Rage Against the McKee on February 20, 2015, 10:20:17 AMQuote from: CNS on February 20, 2015, 10:19:03 AMRight now the west counties are trying like crazy to fund their schools with east county taxes. So, that is probably why.That isn't really true.Interesting if true.Agriculture accounts for about 37% of the state's total economy. Most of the agricultural production is in western KS. Only 11% of the population lives in western KS. Most of the state's oil and gas exploration is also in western KS . . .Yeah, but we are talking taxes and you just listed the two industries with the most tax subsidies and advantages in our country. Also, property tax and stuff.
Given how slow change takes through govt, I feel like the 50 year redesign is a very bad idea
states should be redrawn based upon current population centers and evenly distributed based on population. Redraw the lines every 50-100 years.
Quote from: michigancat on February 20, 2015, 05:14:04 PMstates should be redrawn based upon current population centers and evenly distributed based on population. Redraw the lines every 50-100 years.The western states should be redrawn based upon resource locations. The eastern states were drawn this way. The western states are just big rectangles for the most part.
Quote from: K-S-U-Wildcats! on February 20, 2015, 08:34:15 AMQuote from: Rage Against the McKee on February 20, 2015, 08:06:39 AMQuote from: Headinjun on February 20, 2015, 01:09:40 AMQuote from: Rage Against the McKee on February 19, 2015, 08:09:32 PMQuote from: libliblibliblibliblib on February 19, 2015, 06:00:59 PMyes, kansas counties are way too small. they should have a 100k population minimum perI think they are set up pretty logically. Everyone has easy access to their county seat. The locals get the services/ordinances they want. The idea that people are subjected to more beaurocracy because there are more county governments is laughable.I think the idea of having less sheriffs, less school administration, and less state funding of county governments is a great idea. It could be a quite a local/county tax savings for the people in those areas if they would just collaborate.Not really. They would still have to fund all of those services and they'd have to either send their kids to a school hundreds of miles away or pay for a similar amount of administrators as they are already paying for.Did you just say "hundreds of miles away"? We're talking about consolidating counties - not states.I don't think you know just how big Kansas is. He was talking about reducing the western half of the state to 16 school districts.
Quote from: Rage Against the McKee on February 20, 2015, 08:06:39 AMQuote from: Headinjun on February 20, 2015, 01:09:40 AMQuote from: Rage Against the McKee on February 19, 2015, 08:09:32 PMQuote from: libliblibliblibliblib on February 19, 2015, 06:00:59 PMyes, kansas counties are way too small. they should have a 100k population minimum perI think they are set up pretty logically. Everyone has easy access to their county seat. The locals get the services/ordinances they want. The idea that people are subjected to more beaurocracy because there are more county governments is laughable.I think the idea of having less sheriffs, less school administration, and less state funding of county governments is a great idea. It could be a quite a local/county tax savings for the people in those areas if they would just collaborate.Not really. They would still have to fund all of those services and they'd have to either send their kids to a school hundreds of miles away or pay for a similar amount of administrators as they are already paying for.Did you just say "hundreds of miles away"? We're talking about consolidating counties - not states.
Quote from: Headinjun on February 20, 2015, 01:09:40 AMQuote from: Rage Against the McKee on February 19, 2015, 08:09:32 PMQuote from: libliblibliblibliblib on February 19, 2015, 06:00:59 PMyes, kansas counties are way too small. they should have a 100k population minimum perI think they are set up pretty logically. Everyone has easy access to their county seat. The locals get the services/ordinances they want. The idea that people are subjected to more beaurocracy because there are more county governments is laughable.I think the idea of having less sheriffs, less school administration, and less state funding of county governments is a great idea. It could be a quite a local/county tax savings for the people in those areas if they would just collaborate.Not really. They would still have to fund all of those services and they'd have to either send their kids to a school hundreds of miles away or pay for a similar amount of administrators as they are already paying for.
Quote from: Rage Against the McKee on February 19, 2015, 08:09:32 PMQuote from: libliblibliblibliblib on February 19, 2015, 06:00:59 PMyes, kansas counties are way too small. they should have a 100k population minimum perI think they are set up pretty logically. Everyone has easy access to their county seat. The locals get the services/ordinances they want. The idea that people are subjected to more beaurocracy because there are more county governments is laughable.I think the idea of having less sheriffs, less school administration, and less state funding of county governments is a great idea. It could be a quite a local/county tax savings for the people in those areas if they would just collaborate.
Quote from: libliblibliblibliblib on February 19, 2015, 06:00:59 PMyes, kansas counties are way too small. they should have a 100k population minimum perI think they are set up pretty logically. Everyone has easy access to their county seat. The locals get the services/ordinances they want. The idea that people are subjected to more beaurocracy because there are more county governments is laughable.
yes, kansas counties are way too small. they should have a 100k population minimum per
Quote from: Rage Against the McKee on February 20, 2015, 05:51:28 PMQuote from: michigancat on February 20, 2015, 05:14:04 PMstates should be redrawn based upon current population centers and evenly distributed based on population. Redraw the lines every 50-100 years.The western states should be redrawn based upon resource locations. The eastern states were drawn this way. The western states are just big rectangles for the most part. I think even distribution based around population centers is better (and would basically take care of resource locations). Baltimore/DC/Northern Virginia should be a single state. The NYC metro should be contained in a single state. The Chicago, KC, STL metros, etc.
Quote from: michigancat on February 20, 2015, 06:03:53 PMQuote from: Rage Against the McKee on February 20, 2015, 05:51:28 PMQuote from: michigancat on February 20, 2015, 05:14:04 PMstates should be redrawn based upon current population centers and evenly distributed based on population. Redraw the lines every 50-100 years.The western states should be redrawn based upon resource locations. The eastern states were drawn this way. The western states are just big rectangles for the most part. I think even distribution based around population centers is better (and would basically take care of resource locations). Baltimore/DC/Northern Virginia should be a single state. The NYC metro should be contained in a single state. The Chicago, KC, STL metros, etc.Where do you put Montana?
Quote from: Rage Against the McKee on February 20, 2015, 06:39:45 PMQuote from: michigancat on February 20, 2015, 06:03:53 PMQuote from: Rage Against the McKee on February 20, 2015, 05:51:28 PMQuote from: michigancat on February 20, 2015, 05:14:04 PMstates should be redrawn based upon current population centers and evenly distributed based on population. Redraw the lines every 50-100 years.The western states should be redrawn based upon resource locations. The eastern states were drawn this way. The western states are just big rectangles for the most part. I think even distribution based around population centers is better (and would basically take care of resource locations). Baltimore/DC/Northern Virginia should be a single state. The NYC metro should be contained in a single state. The Chicago, KC, STL metros, etc.Where do you put Montana?With Denver's state. Or maybe Seattle. Don't know how it shakes out.
Quote from: michigancat on February 20, 2015, 08:34:58 PMQuote from: Rage Against the McKee on February 20, 2015, 06:39:45 PMQuote from: michigancat on February 20, 2015, 06:03:53 PMQuote from: Rage Against the McKee on February 20, 2015, 05:51:28 PMQuote from: michigancat on February 20, 2015, 05:14:04 PMstates should be redrawn based upon current population centers and evenly distributed based on population. Redraw the lines every 50-100 years.The western states should be redrawn based upon resource locations. The eastern states were drawn this way. The western states are just big rectangles for the most part. I think even distribution based around population centers is better (and would basically take care of resource locations). Baltimore/DC/Northern Virginia should be a single state. The NYC metro should be contained in a single state. The Chicago, KC, STL metros, etc.Where do you put Montana?With Denver's state. Or maybe Seattle. Don't know how it shakes out.Nothing in Montana is remotely close to Denver or Seattle. That would cause problems.
Quote from: Rage Against the McKee on February 20, 2015, 08:57:39 PMQuote from: michigancat on February 20, 2015, 08:34:58 PMQuote from: Rage Against the McKee on February 20, 2015, 06:39:45 PMQuote from: michigancat on February 20, 2015, 06:03:53 PMQuote from: Rage Against the McKee on February 20, 2015, 05:51:28 PMQuote from: michigancat on February 20, 2015, 05:14:04 PMstates should be redrawn based upon current population centers and evenly distributed based on population. Redraw the lines every 50-100 years.The western states should be redrawn based upon resource locations. The eastern states were drawn this way. The western states are just big rectangles for the most part. I think even distribution based around population centers is better (and would basically take care of resource locations). Baltimore/DC/Northern Virginia should be a single state. The NYC metro should be contained in a single state. The Chicago, KC, STL metros, etc.Where do you put Montana?With Denver's state. Or maybe Seattle. Don't know how it shakes out.Nothing in Montana is remotely close to Denver or Seattle. That would cause problems.What kind of problems?
Quote from: michigancat on February 20, 2015, 08:59:22 PMQuote from: Rage Against the McKee on February 20, 2015, 08:57:39 PMQuote from: michigancat on February 20, 2015, 08:34:58 PMQuote from: Rage Against the McKee on February 20, 2015, 06:39:45 PMQuote from: michigancat on February 20, 2015, 06:03:53 PMQuote from: Rage Against the McKee on February 20, 2015, 05:51:28 PMQuote from: michigancat on February 20, 2015, 05:14:04 PMstates should be redrawn based upon current population centers and evenly distributed based on population. Redraw the lines every 50-100 years.The western states should be redrawn based upon resource locations. The eastern states were drawn this way. The western states are just big rectangles for the most part. I think even distribution based around population centers is better (and would basically take care of resource locations). Baltimore/DC/Northern Virginia should be a single state. The NYC metro should be contained in a single state. The Chicago, KC, STL metros, etc.Where do you put Montana?With Denver's state. Or maybe Seattle. Don't know how it shakes out.Nothing in Montana is remotely close to Denver or Seattle. That would cause problems.What kind of problems?The kind of problems K-S-U likes to bitch about. People in the cities have to help fund schools in isolated areas that have industries that prop up the state, etc.