Sunday, January 8, 2012
Jan 5-10
One thing from the reading that interest me most was the concept of suburbanites feeling that they are insulated from urban issues. In the reading the main point that is giving for why the suburban areas should be engaged in urban issues, is due to the cost benefit of providing infrastructure. Providing infrastructure to fringe cities and rural areas is very expensive and not very cost efficient. Urban areas with high densities have less cost to provide these services, but also create a larger users base to spread fixed cost. One of the examples used in class was the idea of someone not using the highway system, thus feeling that they should not have to pay taxes for this form of infrastructure. Even if a person is not themselves driving on the highway system, we ALL still receive a benefit from it. Highways are used to transport goods that are essential for life. Things like clothing, food, and chemicals needed to treat the potable water that we use are brought to us with the use of highways. I feel that this is most interesting because every decision has an out reaching impact. I am excited to learn more of how this is kept to a minimum when creating policy and how it is evaluated before hand.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
You provide an excellent example of the Individualism point of view. Your post reminded me of the people who are so focused on their own self interest that they refuse to support school tax initiatives because they either do not have kids or worse, their kids no long attend school.
ReplyDeleteI actually thought Markus took a bit of a communitarian approach because he is pointing out that the services benefit all people and we should should share in those costs collectively. I completely agree with the costs of having people move away from the city center when it comes to service delivery, but there are other factors to consider. In my opinion, having high volumes of people crammed into tight spaces is not conducive to good public health. This is a problem that was very apparent throughout history. Even with many modern amenities that promote health (e.g. garbage pick-up, sewer, running water, etc), disease spread and unsanitary conditions would still be concerns of mine. Also, the housing is likely to be in the form of apartments in a downtown area and the presence of a slumlord could result in less than ideal building conditions (i.e. buildings in need of repair, leaky pipes, etc), which also decreases an individual's ability to have a healthy lifestyle.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you Markus, I feel many suburbanites do not believe that we can all benefit from what a city has even if we don't actually use it. Yes, the impact could be large or very small but it is still an impact in someway. All issues within a city certainly do make an impact on each and everyone that resides within that city. An example of this might be something like crime, if some one shoplifts, we all pay for that item through raised prices in the stores or having to employ more police force will raise our taxes to afford the man power needed. No one is exempt from the issues in thier urban city.
ReplyDeleteGreat example of members in our society paying for freeways even if they never personally drive on them, but they in some way or form are gaining a benefit from that highway (such as food transportation). I feel that many if not all services and infrastructures provided to us is in some way or another connected, and will either positively or negatively effect society as a whole.
ReplyDeleteI still find it interesting that people complain about paying taxes. Although they may not use something like education or highway system they are still benefiting from another resource that is being provided by taxes. Someone that doesn't have kids may feel like they are being unfairly taxed because they have no children in school but the roadway they use to get to work and back home is being matained by tax dollars. I remember in class when the subject of someone not using the highway system should not have to pay for it, the first thing that came to mind was that how do they expect to get goods. Food, clothing and other needs are being delivered by trucks that use those highways. Highways are main arteries to get around a city and this country. Without them goods would take to long to be delivered. Thank you for your post and good luck in the class.
ReplyDeleteUsing the distribution of goods and services is a well thought out reasoning for why everyone should participate in the taxes on highways. Of course, there is always going to be the people who can support proof that they are entirely self sufficient in their local area (i.e. buy locally grown goods, services, and products) and actually do not use the highways. But as with any policy, there are going to be people who don't fit the mold. I think a better policy for highway maintenance and development is through tolls. Many people may disagree, but tolls make the system much more fair; the cost is weighed on the people who use the highways more. Tolls can also be looked upon as a deterrent from driving all together which would be great. Just as wealthier people should pay higher taxes, people who drive on highways more should pay more for their upkeep.
ReplyDelete