Hacker News Reader

Actually, if I were proposing a "final solution," I would simply advocate that urban areas simply stop paying Federal and State taxes. Without government subsidization, rural areas unable to financially support themselves would vanish very quickly.

But I'm not advocating that. I'm suggesting we provide support to dying communities to voluntarily relocate to where the jobs are. Communities that are doing fine would obviously forego such an option.

View on HN

But they wouldn't be doing fine for long. Inevitably, policy would be structured that made those communities less able to fend for themselves. It always happens--structures of control always seek more control, and more people in fewer places means easier to control.

I'm afraid we're talking past each other--your arguments are about economics, mine concern the right to self-determination.

I don't think we are really talking past each other. To me this an issue of self-determination as well. I lived in a small town completely lacking employment opportunities for 10 years. The kids who were able to move out got careers, those who couldn't are stuck working in the service industry. With a little government assistance, they could move to where the careers are.

I regret the blunt, clinical way I communicated this in my original post.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com