It seems that San Jose is scheduled to receive a fair share of stimulus dollars from the federal government. But, is it really “fair” or right for one of the wealthiest regions of the country to accept federal money? I say, we should forward our money to another area of the country that is in greater need.
More than $15 million of federal stimulus funds will be spent to repair streets in San Jose. “San Jose has some of the bumpiest roads in the nation, lined with cracks and potholes seemingly from end to end,” wrote Gary Richards of the Mercury News. Richards also reported that the City of San Jose has 2,300 miles of streets and a deferred maintenance backlog of $283 million!
When one of America’s wealthiest cities (at least it should be) can’t provide for the maintenance of its streets, you know that something is very wrong. Either you have the wrong form of government, or the system has been corrupted. San Jose created its problems….San Jose should create its own solutions.
As for others…according to the Census Bureau, Mississippi has the highest poverty rate in the nation, a stunningly high rate of 21.2% Kentucky, West Virginia, and Arkansas follow closely behind with a poverty rate around 17%
Just imagine, if the Mayor of San Jose were to call a press conference to announce that the City of San Jose will donate its entire share of stimulus package money to a new Sister City in the South! Such a gesture would make a resounding statement and enhance San Jose’s image around the State of California and beyond.
Every tax payer in CA is already subsidizing those states, each of which receives far more in federal spending than they pay in taxes. CA gets something like $.78 of federal investment back for every $1 it sends to DC while the poor states you mention get investments far in excess of the tax dollars they pay. Why should San Jose add to that imbalance?
It’s hard to argue with your point. I just think that it is not right (and downright embarassing for one of the richest areas in the world to accept a bailout when others need it more).
If we have some of the worst roads in the country then how can others need it more?
Let’s send them plastic bags instead.
Um, no.
Pete,
Of course you didn’t expect to find any sympathy for your idea amongst the progressive liberals here, not because they are generally lacking in compassion, but because they are completely lacking in compassion for poor white people. Had you targeted those federal millions for the poor Africans of Darfur or Eritrea—or the indigenous peasants of Chiapas or Cauca, rather than the white, rural poor of Kentucky, you’d be getting cheers here instead of jeers. Progressives would rather see American dollars sent overseas to non-Americans than be spent here helping poor white Americans. Plus, it just feels so much better when they “help” people of color, especially those who live so far away that no one need ever see the help fail, as it inevitably does. But then, charity, even when it fails to help, still feels good provided it feeds the self-image and political perspective of the givers.
Stipulate that the money be spent on programs to educate Kentuckians on how to sneeze into their elbows properly so as to avoid the dreaded flu.
If we’re going to question the Government’s intent and the best way the money should be spent, let’s not stop at half-measures. This money should all go to widows of anti-Government protestors in Guinea after the violence on Monday.
As long as Peter is screaming for San Jose’s stimulus money to head down South, may we in Dublin trouble you for some silver?
It is not the same since the poteen stills have been shut down, and all of the paddies are having to work for wages.