41 thoughts on “Why government agencies should move from DC to the Midwest

  1. I really and truly want the US national capital to be relocated to near Baker Montana, close to Theodore National Park, which is a fairly historic area in North Dakota.

  2. You're not addressing why those particular cities lost their population–because they were extremely mismanaged, and no one wants to live in areas that are heavily impacted by the welfare state policies. Move the agencies? Great. Don't move them to those places, which suspiciously you chose Ohio and Michigan–the extreme east of the midwest, and by far the most blue of those states.

  3. Sorry, I think this is thought provoking, but completely unreasonable. yes land value is crazy high in DC, but if we were to spread out these agencies, the cost to move them somewhere else and the cost to move the people around for travel is now an issue. like the DIA to the Pentagon could be a few states away. Some of these agencies require close proximity. Congressman visiting the Pentagon, then walking over to their office, or taking a short car ride to the white house. That would require flights and perdiem in hotels if spread out to other states. I hope video teleconference tech gets better with the advent of 5G signal. Until then, these other cities that are losing their population need to find ways to generate business and population growth….or just adjust to a new way of life.

  4. I whole heartedly agree… especially since the government actively decentralized our industrial base after WWII so the soviets couldn't do one long range bombing run and take out all of our factories.

  5. Yeah, to just look at the population by the city proper is kinda deceptive as it paints a picture that these cities are small. The Cincinnati metro area is over 2 million. Which is 86% more than city proper. Don't fudge the numbers to push your view. It's insulting to your viewers' intelligence.

  6. not far enough! Move the Press Room and 30% of the US Goverment to Lincoln Nebraska Right in the middle of the Continent, like Brazilia, Moscou, Delhi, Bogota, etc. A recommendation from Canada …. 🙂

  7. I think people are going to start moving to this region because of the freshwater and to escape the effects of climate change

  8. I live near Cleveland, the Great Lakes are a big plus.
    I look at places like LA and even Florida it doesn't seem like they have very enough fresh water.
    You can grow crops here like corn without irrigating.
    I've only heard of one forest fire I've lived here since 1970 and it burned a hundred acres.

  9. Then those jobs will cause taxpayers to make those workers to move… maybe improve those option’s security first?

  10. By the way Grand Rapids city is the fastest growing economy in America and one of the fastest growing populations too. Their airport ranks number as well

  11. Relying on the government to employ people is extraordinarily dangerous. Not only do they provide absolutely no tax base for the city they reside in, they do not provide an economic base for other companies to move in. Also, the policies implemented by said agencies in the past 50 years is the reason cities like Cleveland have fallen apart. I don't care if you want to cry R or D here, it's totally irrelevant as both parties are to blame. But to quote Reagan, "…government is not the solution."

  12. So we're just going to prop up dying cities with federal funds (debt) for massive, unaccountable federal agencies? What a great idea.

  13. No one seems to be mentioning the fact that it would make it so terror attacks on DC would be less likely to paralyze all parts of government. If you get the city to shutdown, you may have effectively shutdown the ENTIRE government… These may be non-political parts of the government, but stopping their jobs at the wrong time can only increase the damage done by a disaster.

  14. So you’re basically arguing that we need to “spread the wealth around”. I see many problems with this proposal. There are also advantages to having everything centralized in one area, I don’t know how much of a boost a few agencies here and there would provide to those new areas without the collective power of being centralized, and the amount workers are paid will be relative to the cost of living in those new areas, so those workers will get paid closer to the median level of Cleveland or Detroit, not of D.C. Then you have to uproot people who may be unwilling or unable to relocate, so you may lose some critical workers in the process. I was looking for an argument for how moving would increase the effectiveness of the core duties that these agencies are tasked with performing, and I didn’t see that in this video.

  15. DC isn't that bad, try cities like London, every political establishment like Washington and also every financial establishment like NYC.

  16. The problem is that the local and state governments have laws that are bad for employees. They encourage discrimination. They have laws and regulations that take away the rights of workers to organize for better pay. They have laws and regulations that hurt renters. Their police forces hurt and harass minorities.

  17. This is kinda pointless, the governmental agencies are headquartered in their own country of origin, I.E “The District of Columbia” which operated as a sovereign state within the borders of the United States of America. They have no reason or incentive to move.

  18. They tried this in Australia, with a number of state and federal departments. People just resigned. And the departments had to massively increase salaries to entice people to live in undesirable areas. Well educated people do not want to live in Armidale.

  19. One of the reasons so many institutions are clustered in DC is so that they can lobby Congress. Institutions in the area are generally well funded and are better represented.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *