• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

White House launches new initiative to get federal dollars to rural America

How about wiping out the debt? I'm glad that happened in the first year of TFG.
C'mon, cut his administration some slack. They were too busy drafting the great big beautiful health care plan he promised that would fix all the alleged deficiencies of the ACA.
 
Any voter that voted for Biden is a democrat cultist, and you don't have the balls to admit that he is incompetent.

None of you do....period.
Well, there's also the folks who would have voted for an empty paper bag instead of the incumbent. I don't know what that breakdown is among the 81 million though.
 
C'mon, cut his administration some slack. They were too busy drafting the great big beautiful health care plan he promised that would fix all the alleged deficiencies of the ACA.
they also got us out of Afghanistan and passed infrastructure every week.
 
saw this elsewhere...


"You mean, a President doesn't withhold financial help from states that did not vote for him???"
I do think there’s a question as to whether trying to prop up rural areas is a good allocation of resources. Can federal investments revive dying economies or reverse the tangled social pathologies of these rural areas whose populations do nothing but shrink? Seems questionable. Dems talk about rural broadband like its rural electrification in 1930 and half the country or more is still in rural areas, but the reality is that’s less than 20% of the country now—perhaps there are better ways to spend money than getting Farmer Fred faster internet so he can keep up on QAnon’s latest hits. Perhaps we’d do better to build more housing near the ~80% of the country that’s urbanized to make it easier for folks to escape rural America.

Those hoping this will win traditional GOP votes should look no further than the rightwingers in this thread sneering at this as a waste of money—they may be right!
 
And it doesn't include more take breaks for trump and musk...



"The White House officials contend the billions sit available to rural communities thanks to a bevy of programs tucked inside the American Rescue Plan and the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law.

"We need to finish the job by making sure rural communities can access these resources,” a senior administration official said, adding that the federal government has long been too difficult to navigate."



Attempting to buy votes is dem bread and butter.
 
Attempting to buy votes is dem bread and butter.
 
Yea both sides do it all the time. More of a mainstay for the dems though.
 
I do think there’s a question as to whether trying to prop up rural areas is a good allocation of resources. Can federal investments revive dying economies or reverse the tangled social pathologies of these rural areas whose populations do nothing but shrink? Seems questionable. Dems talk about rural broadband like its rural electrification in 1930 and half the country or more is still in rural areas, but the reality is that’s less than 20% of the country now—perhaps there are better ways to spend money than getting Farmer Fred faster internet so he can keep up on QAnon’s latest hits. Perhaps we’d do better to build more housing near the ~80% of the country that’s urbanized to make it easier for folks to escape rural America.

Those hoping this will win traditional GOP votes should look no further than the rightwingers in this thread sneering at this as a waste of money—they may be right!
Those are valid questions, but I think the answer is yes.
I can only speak to my neck of the woods, which borders the western edge of Appalachia.
The vast majority of folks in the region are not farmers, but folks who live in and around small towns that have seen economic decline even from the moderately poor status they once had. Can that be helped? I'm guardedly optimistic. Moreover, the money has already been legislatively provided. Whether that was a good idea or not can be questioned. But the fact is, the money is sitting there now.

As for your last point, I don't think anyone believes the effort is going to lure votes from the people who are staunch Trump supporters.
 
Ouch
 
Back
Top Bottom