(04-10-2018 04:09 PM)McKinney Wrote:  

(04-10-2018 02:43 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Well, that could be because those earmarked funds range from water projects, to manufacturing incentives to programs for the impoverished. Thanks to the death of small privately owned business in most of the smaller more rural counties due to an influx of corporate chain stores there is now a dichotomy between the formally educated and their earning power and those living with Walmart, Target, Best Buy, Home Depot, Lowes, and name your burger brand jobs.

There's a big difference between earmarked Federal funds and Federal Research Grants. The former is the product of politics, and hopefully the latter is still a universal priority for the betterment of life.

Come on man, you don't think that's impacted Minnesota, Illinois, Nebraska, Ohio, Kansas, New York, Colorado, Utah, Oklahoma, Wyoming, Massachusetts, and California?

Now those states are also home to some big cities, but they also have their fair share of rural land. Somehow they're not on the fed's dole.

Agree & disagree with you & JR. I agree with you in that what JR has said in his post that you quoted has impacted the state of California. In the state of California, IMO, a lot of the middle class has fled leaving either the very wealthy & affluent or the working class with a lot of low income, transient residents who actually prefer to live in the rural areas of California.