Dallas, TX

[Tuberski]

Albert, a lot of Texas is empty and therefore doesn't require services.

According to 2008 estimates texas has a population density of 92.92 sq/mile, while Pennsylvania has a density of 277.76/sq. mile.

What this means is that, most of the Texas population is concentrated in smaller areas.



see?

ACK!

[Hauldren Collider]

I'm trolling the likes of Oerdin and Kidicious

Read: People I disagree with generally wrt fiscal policy

[Al B. Sure!]

Albert, a lot of Texas is empty and therefore doesn't require services.

ACK!

? They're still like the 3rd most populous state.

[Tuberski]

Pennsylvania, however looks like this:



More area in which services are necessary.

ACK!

[Al B. Sure!]

Interesting... good to see it's not JUST a case of retarded fiscal policy. There's structural reasons for this.

[KrazyHorse]

No, that's pretty much it. I don't buy the efficiency/pop density claim as anything other than a marginal issue.

[teresa412009]

He's in for a rude awakening.

are you sure?

[SlowwHand]

Texas is the 2nd most populated state as of 2009. I don't know that the density makes too much difference. Houston is bigger than Philadelphia and Dallas is bigger than Pittsburgh and San Antonio is bigger than whatever is 3rd in Pennsylvania. I don't think it matters. It's not like Alaska with 90% of the population in Anchorage or SLC with 90% of the population in Utah.

[Al B. Sure!]

San Antonio actually has more people than Dallas although less than Dallas-Ft. Worth. Pittsburgh's surprisingly small (60th in the country at 310K [less than Cincinnati, Bakersfield, CA and Aurora, CO). And 3rd in the state is Billy Joel's favorite city, Allentown!

As for density, there's a lot of things that could be going on. I'm not sure how these things play into each other but I'm musing of the effects. I imagine it's more cost efficient to an extent to operate services in populated areas because if you consider a low populated region still requires services such as police protection which necessitates a station, a minimum number of cops, and squad cars, which can become very costly per capita compared to a more densely-populated area. It's just an economies of scale thing. Now, that obviously, would make running Texas look more costly than PA but if areas are so lowly populated that there is no expectation of services (no expectation of legitimate police or firefighters; no expectation of waste management, etc. [Aside, I actually have no idea at all how things are in the country. Do they have garbage disposal? Water treatment? I imagine they have plumbing but it seems like a costly infrastructure for isolated areas]), then that could mean something for with regards to Texas because most of PA is moderately populated so those areas may be provided with urban-level services even if it is not cost-effective to provide them.

[SlowwHand]

We have everything anyone else has. Yes, cops. Yes firefighters. Now, out in rural areas they're likely to go with septic tanks. Yes, garbage trucks...in town. Tuberski is true about a lot of rural. My point was that despite the rural, there's some population, too.
It's still indoor plumbing. Contrary to popular Apolyton belief, we're not living in primitive surroundings.
Abilene, Lubbock, Amarillo and others may be set in rural areas, but when you're adding 100k of people in the city limits, then add in those in rural areas outside the city limits, the numbers start going up.

[DaShi]

Regular gun killings (often by police) and a speedy justice system leading to death penalties keep the population under control and eliminate those who would be the greatest financial burden on the state.

[Ghaladh]

Holy cow, KrazyHorse, surely life must have been hard for you for making such a bitter character of you, or perhaps is some sort of Turette's syndrome that brings you to call names anyone who disagree with you. I feel like you are a deluded guy with a terrible inferiority complex, by considering your ramblings about how skilled you are and how stupid are the others that write things that do not suit with what you know.
I never saw such extensive use of asterisks to hide words that you unlikely use commonly with your (very probably few) friends. I let the discussion die about how rude you was, since "what the hell are you talking about" is a rude thing to say in my book, but since you inveigh against everyone, I ask myself if really you read your own posts or if you have at least the basic knowledge of how a polite conversation should be held, too.
Is like that the way you behave with the people who interact with you in real life? If so, I hope you are a trained boxing champion, otherwise you will spend most of your time in the emergency lane at the hospital.
I still would like to know from where you are, because I am sure that immigration is not such a "easy nuisance" to you, at the opposite of what you said.

Returning on topic, I am curious to know about how a state can work with such low tax-rate. Italy is surely not the most shining example of good administration, but I can't imagine how can a country be run without a large amount of money from the tax-payer. We have, alas, a lot of corrupted politicians (well, actually ANY politician in Italy is corrupt) so that creates a black-hole in the money-flow, but still without the money there is no service. In Italy we have to pay the 15% minimum of taxes on any money-transaction (salaries, buying and selling, savings...), more than that we have a property tax regulated on the personal income, a service tax... more or less 40% of your salary goes into taxes. I must say that we have a healthy nationl health-service (called "Mutua", introduced by Benito Mussolini during the Fascist domination - one of the few good things he did for the population) which is free for the less fortunate families and very cheap for the others (although is painful in the southern side of Italy because of Mafia's meddling).

Perhaps the government of Texas held some sort of nationalized companies to maintain a constant income? Can it be?

Ghaladh: How long is the post-doc and what are you looking to rent: a house or an apartment?

The post-doc will be two years long or something more (you never know exactly). My "almost-wife" is the grant-holder, so she has the freedom to administrate the funds as she thinks better. Actually, she can go wherever she wants with her money; she has chosen Dallas because the city guests one of the most good-famed laboratories in the world for her field (circadian rythm researches). We are more used to apartments and we don't need much space so I think that we will go for a two-rooms.

To clarify my "immigrant position", I must say that a help-desk job could be suitable to me just because of my professional background, but I am also a novelist and I am starting to publishing my book in Italy; that could allow me to work in USA from home, letting me to earn my living in my homecountry. That's more likely what's going to happen. I can stay in USA with a turistic permit, without necessarily fighting to find my place in there.

After Dallas we plan to go back in Europe (actually we have to, since when her permit expires we will be forced to go back).

More than that, I have a friend in San Diego that I helped in the past. He obtained the US citizenship by marrying a American woman and he's the owner of a small disco-music publishing company (I don't know the company's name). He offered to return the favor I did to him in the past, by giving me his sponsorship (kindness always pays back, gotcha KH? ;-) ). Once I am a regular worker in the USA, it will be easier to move to another state.
One of my ex-girlfriends lives in New York and she owes me one as well.
Another ex of mine is actually married with a Italian diplomat in Washington that can help me with burocracy. I maintened excellent relationships with almost all of my ex (kindness always pays back, gotcha KH? ;-) ).

I fear I will never obtain citizenship in the USA since I am filed as a left-wing extremist in my country (it's a long story), but for what I have to do in the USA, I will not meet big problems anyway.

[Hauldren Collider]

Galadh, I think you need to lurk for a few months more before making another post. Then you'll understand KrazyHorse a bit better.

[DaShi]

KH is easy to deal with if you know when to stroke his. . .ego.

[Ben Kenobi]

Yeah but why is Texas more 'efficient' in their spending? That doesn't make any sense either unless Texas has proportionately fewer cops, fewer firefighters, etc. etc. Texas is bigger with a bigger population. Generally speaking, they should be spending MORE than PA.

Not on a proportional basis. There's this thing called economies of scale.

Texas also has heavy industries. PA has done everything they can to discourage mining, so they shouldn't be surprised when their revenues go down.

Texas also spends less on benefits. Cost of living is also lower than PA, which is dominated by Philly.