|
Pretty much any of the red/pink areas on this map east of the rockies are what I consider the south. Trying to argue that Texas is not culturally part of the south is hilarious. Please continue. 
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2014 01:33
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 07:25 |
|
|
Koyaanisgoatse posted:I mean, probably not Delaware, and West Virginia and Maryland are debatable Have you ever been to West Virginia?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2014 01:40
|
|
|
Road spending is like 3% of the overall budget. Please try again. Actually it is probably less than that. Realedit: Some info on highway funding here https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policyinformation/pubs/hf/pl11028/chapter6.cfm crabcakes66 fucked around with this message at 17:13 on Jul 7, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2014 17:07
|
|
|
computer parts posted:There is undoubtedly an urban-rural divide though Absolutely. That is more my general impression when looking at that chart. "People live here and have been living here for a while."
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2014 17:47
|
|
|
Tatum Girlparts posted:Also literally every region claims it's 'real America' do you not see all the bullshit on the east coast about how it's the 'soul of American history' or whatever or in the midwest about how it's the heartland and poo poo? Growing up in the NE and currently living in the south. No it's not the same thing. Pretty much no one in the NE outside of academic circles would identify themselves in such a manner. A lot of the independent identity from southerners is probably directly traceable to the confederacy. And you just don't see that sort of thing in other parts of the country outside of marketing BS or very localized identities like major cities or colleges.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 8, 2014 02:22
|
|
|
Calling Nevada, Arizona and Utah urban states is kind of hilarious. I mean Arizona is the closest to "urban". But outside of Vegas and Reno, Nevada is a loving wasteland.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 9, 2014 19:47
|
|
|
computer parts posted:The fact that no one lives outside of Reno and Vegas is why Nevada is considered urban. That's the definition of urbanization. Right but it's a dumb way to categorize things as you can bet those urban centers are positive in revenue that get dragged down by having no one else in the rest of a huge state.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 9, 2014 19:55
|
|
|
computer parts posted:No actually the opposite will happen. Since everyone lives in centralized areas you can lower costs (because you don't need as many roads, medical stuff, etc). Basically what I am trying to say is that negative revenue Urban states should get a pass. As the areas where people actually live are really revenue positive. eidt: And you can't expect much revenue from empty land. crabcakes66 fucked around with this message at 20:20 on Jul 9, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Jul 9, 2014 20:17
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 07:25 |
|
|
MizPiz posted:Except that if they were actually revenue positive, they would be listed as revenue positive. Can't have revenue without people. And that image is not even accurate according to wikipedia. In millions of USD: Rev-- Expend Washington $59,880-- $44,771 Nevada $15,858-- $13,651 etc http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_taxation_and_spending_by_state According to this the worst offenders for FY2013 by far are South Carolina and North Dakota.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 9, 2014 21:44
|
|