Tuesday, December 6, 2016

What One Beggar Said to the Other Beggar

The Urban Liberal comments on MP are driving me CRAZY...  Repeatedly they bring up that the rural areas of MN receive LGA from the metro...  Then imply that this should in some way impact what and/or who the rural folks choose to vote for...  All the while ignoring the fact that most of the DFL controlled urban areas in MN receive LOTS and LOTS of LGA in absolute dollars.

So who is supplying all this LGA and receiving none? Per the MP tool below, it is the GOP controlled outer suburbs.  So does this mean that the DFL urban communities should comply with the wishes of the citizens of the outer burbs just because they are paying the bills?

I think the Urban Liberals need to develop their gratitude and giving skills further.

MP Confused
MP Morrison County Voted Trump
"Minnpost created an interesting tool awhile back. MP LGA Tool

Please note that it is the GOP controlled Burbs that are supporting the folks in the other cities. And as a citizen of Plymouth, you are all welcome. Those of you who live in Minneapolis/St Paul and those who live in Little Falls." G2A
And no I am not saying that the Urban Liberals should change their beliefs or votes, but I do think they should stop criticizing their fellow beggar just because they believe differently. 


Laurie said...

While I am usually reluctant to wade into these discussions I will throw my 2 cents in this time. Maybe the liberals would just like the rural people to support needs in the city, such as transit, as the city / suburban tax payers provide support for rural needs.

John said...

Please note that the suburban/ rural folks are already supporting the "needs" of the urban areas with a HUGE amount of money each year.

And they already help fund the transit "wants" of the urban areas with buses and some light rail.

How much more do you think the suburban / rural folks should give to the urban center?

The question here of course is are the affluent suburbs and their citizens in Medina, Chanhassen, Minnetonka, Plymouth, Woodbury, etc more like the rural folks or more like the urban folks?

Typically the urban folks complain about these fiscal Conservatives. But when it comes to complain about our rural neighbors, they are more than happy to claim the Suburban wealth as their own.

John said...

To add insult to injury, then the Urban Liberals have the nerve to call people who believe differently than them by hateful names.

Personally I think we should financially cut off the urban areas until they learn to be nicer and more appreciative of the others in our state. :-)

Laurie said...

I thought rural areas got more back on the dollar than what they pay in. Kind of like all the red states. While the twin cities get less back on the dollar, kind of like MN at the federal level of taxation. I really don't know as I usually skim read these posts/comments at best.

jerrye92002 said...

Laurie has the right idea in that there is a factual approach here, rather than a lot of raucous finger-pointing. Fact is that LGA was intended to go to those small municipalities which did not have an adequate tax base to fund a basic level of services-- police, fire, etc. Instead, the vast bulk of the money goes to Mpls and St. Paul, which have HUGE tax bases and don't need the money. Other cities, well, it seems like it matters whether they vote DFL or not. I don't have a FACT here, but that's my not-entirely-unfounded opinion.

It's the same thing nationally, that we pay federal taxes for federal things, and since the tax base varies by state yet every state requires a certain basic level of federal "stuff," some areas get less back on the dollar and others get more. It's why it is stupid for MN to say we're getting "federal money" for light rail when, had we kept those taxes here, we could have saved about 30% (or 100%). If you really want to be upset by it, consider that the Virginia county across from DC gets back SEVEN dollars for every dollar they pay in taxes, compared to Minnesota's 70 cents.

John said...

Here it is again... MP LGA Tool

Both rural MN and urban MN receive a lot of money...

That money comes from the wealthy burbs who get NO LGA...

Laurie said...

I was thinking broader than LGA, like taxes collected and money spent on schools and roads etc. I believe the state funds like 80% of the cost of public schools. It seems likely to me that some communities get more in benefits ($ spent by the state) than they contribute in taxes to the coffers.

Also, I am a suburban voter but I think of myself as a metro person rather than a suburban person. I am all in favor of transit, even though I rarely use it. Transit must help a little in cutting down on rush hour traffic jams which I suffer through every day.

John said...

I am guessing they will all look similar since the most progressive tax in our State is the Income tax. And a lot of the high income folks live outside the 494/694 loop.

Besides I think Mpls and St Paul are our most expensive districts.

John said...

What burb do you live in?

Inside or outside the loop?

One other point I continually raise... MN spends a lot on the roads between here and cabin country... Do you think of that as a rural, suburban or urban expenditure?

Do you think the farmers need a 4 lane road around Brained?

Laurie said...

I live outside the 494 loop and I think that there are a lot of miles of rural road of little value to metro people visiting their cabin. I don't object to money spent on rural schools, roads, and other services etc., I just don't think rural people should be complaining about unfairness or blocking metro needs/priorities.

jerrye92002 said...

If we were talking about metro "needs" we probably would not have a problem, but LRT is not a "need" in the sense of being justified by the relief of traffic congestion, convenience, cost per passenger-mile, or as "saving the planet." 99+% of urban trips take place outside the LRT lines.

John, I couldn't see your graphic at the link, but since the chart is per capita, I don't think it obviates my point, that the big cities, with lots of resources already, get more dollars of LGA than do the small towns that really need it. And the suburbs have been voting Republican, so...

John said...

Technically it is an interactive map that you can zoom in on and see which each city gets per capita.

Some of the rural communities do get more per capita, but I would guess that the majority of absolute dollars go to urban communities. (ie more people)

And my primary point is that how dare Urban Liberals use money transfers to belittle rural folks when they are also on the dole.