
Break Up the Liberal City - closeparen
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/25/opinion/sunday/break-up-the-liberal-city.html?smid=fb-nytimes&smtyp=cur&_r=0
======
closeparen
Interesting polemic.

No arguments on government. Institutions which are _intended_ to be "of the
people" should look like it geographically. Federal facilities already _are_
doled out around the country as political pork, but headquarters could be a
little more distributed, in addition to back-offices. Even if it changes
nothing about the nature of the institutions, it would likely increase trust
in them. We could do with some of that. It _would_ cause more taxpayer-funded
air travel, which certainly won't be popular.

The whole country benefits immensely from the research done by the densely
packed brilliant minds at elite universities, and from the middle-class kids
who were educated in their undergraduate divisions thanks to financial aid
from their endowments. Trying to tax away their ability to fund low and middle
income students seems like the opposite of what you want. Trying to dilute
them into being like all other commuter colleges fits the author's point about
disbanding clustered elites, I guess.

I think there is immense value in having elite universities. We should be
making sure they are elite in terms of intellectual capability and academic
work ethic, rather than family wealth, by raising all K12 schools to the
standards of the ones that feed Ivies.

As I understand it, in the German higher education system, some universities
_are_ the best in their field, but they are all state-sponsored and the
admissions process is nationalized, with a merit component and a lottery
component, and no special allowances for probable donors. Maybe we need that.

------
nickbauman
There has been an over 10,000 year trend toward urbanization. Nothing like
this has ever happened before. It can't work on so many levels.

Also consider red state economics work well for the youthful poor, too.
Housing is much more affordable than places like NYC or SF or even Chicago. I
live in Minneapolis. I would be taking a huge pay cut to live in a tiny place
in any of these big cities. But then I don't want to move to Louisville,
either.

~~~
seanp2k2
But you'd probably also make 2-5x working in a city, assuming you're doing
something like tech, finance, real estate, etc. Everything locally costs more,
rent costs more, but there's still more dollars left at the end of the month.
Cars still cost the same. Buy a house somewhere you want to live, work in a
city for a while while renting the house, then move into your paid-off home
elsewhere after 3-5 years.

~~~
nickbauman
In SF, I'd only make 10-20% more than MPLS. But my housing would be 2-5x. This
is a pay CUT. Louisville it's even more extreme. I might get a 30-40% pay
raise, but my housing would be 3x-8x.

------
peterwwillis
The article does not say _why_ we should break up the liberal city. It just
kind of rambles.

It seems to want to lead to some sort of sprawling country where everyone has
an equal portion of land and money, and incentivize "spreading out" jobs and
taxes rather than concentrating them. So centers for investment, learning, and
business building would lose money by taxation, then spread out geographically
and lose people, and eventually nobody would want to do business in this
country, or live here in the interest of the arts or academia, and people
would leave in droves to foreign nations where there are still big cities
where people can draw together their varied interests into a (somewhat)
multicultural metropolis.

------
carsongross
It is a shame that, rather than accepting that there are vastly different
peoples within the united states and we need to secede sovereignty to one
another peacefully, we are intent on correcting one another on issues that
are, for the most part, subjective and fall back on disagreements around moral
axioms, about which reason has little to offer.

Why on earth should San Francisco and Dallas have any government in common?
They should each go to hell in their own way.

Why are we fighting? Why not a firm handshake and a friendly wave goodbye?

------
Upvoter33
I have yet to see a serious piece of thinking from Douthat, and this piece
doesn't change that. In fact, the only good point he makes is not one he
intends: how inherently unfair our current structures are. "... actually
weakened liberalism politically by concentrating its votes." This is true, and
not a problem of the city, but rather of our outdated voting system. Not that
we'll ever be able to address that.

------
xupybd
What an ass, this is the same holier than thou crap from the left that got
Trump in in the first place.

"while the Trumpish hinterland languishes in resentment and nostalgia."

Come on these are people too and you can't just write them off as hill
billies. They're not beyond reach if you try to reach them, but if you attack
them they're gonna get alienated.

Edit: I read the first few paragraphs and didn't read the rest. I now see I
was totally wrong.

~~~
sciurus
Having read the whole thing I think this editorial is rather silly, but you're
not giving it a fair chance. The portion you quoted is the author paraphrasing
someone else's argument. His very next sentence begins with the sentence "I
respectfully dissent."

~~~
antonvs
> Having read the whole thing I think this editorial is rather silly

The solution is (probably) silly, although there are merits to the problem
statement.

