General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Maps Show the Extremes of U.S. Population Density [View all]modrepub
(3,943 posts)to economic activity (for the most part). Money just flows more quickly in densely populated areas. Salaries are generally higher, shop density is higher and property is generally more expensive (thus property taxes and sales commissions are higher).
All this means tax revenue generation is probably much higher in densely populated areas when compared to rural areas. In my mind that's very important to the current federal and state government structure. As long as rural areas have equal or greater representation than the urban/suburban areas at the federal and state levels, then they can (and they do) direct more tax revenue to their areas which is out of proportion to what they contribute.
This is the real story behind all this. The pilfering of tax revenue from urban and suburban areas to rural areas. Democrats need to limit this type of tax revenue transfer. Cementing the suburban/urban coalition is important if Democrats are going to be able to counter the Republicans. Making this tax revenue transfer more known will keep this coalition together.
Edit history
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):