by neroden
The Central Valley of California *is* poor, with high unemployment, and hit hard by the current Depression.
It's being hit hard enough that gas prices and the cost of automobile ownership are starting to become hardships. Airplane service is terrible and expensive.
Meanwhile, it remains a zone which is not internally sustainable; its businesses are dependent on transportation to other, more alive cities; oil drilling is in decline, and while agricultural product may go by truck or freightcar, the people running the businesses need to make deals, too.
It's more alive to the north end than to the south end, though; for someone in Bakersfield, easy access to Fresno is actually a significant improvement.
Sacramento isn't ideal as a "real city" connection, but people in the CV will take the train to Sacramento, and they'll take the train to SF via the current roundabout route, and they'll even take the bus to LA. More will go to LA or SF if good rail connections are ever made. I think tolerance for high fares will be pretty low unless there are some changes made in economic policy.
Yes, finishing the LA-Bakersfield mountain crossing is important.
Regarding "kitchen table economics", it applies well to the people of the Central Valley... but not to the California government. Governments are not like households, economically. (Neither are banks.) Failure to understand this leads to many misconceptions.
It's being hit hard enough that gas prices and the cost of automobile ownership are starting to become hardships. Airplane service is terrible and expensive.
Meanwhile, it remains a zone which is not internally sustainable; its businesses are dependent on transportation to other, more alive cities; oil drilling is in decline, and while agricultural product may go by truck or freightcar, the people running the businesses need to make deals, too.
It's more alive to the north end than to the south end, though; for someone in Bakersfield, easy access to Fresno is actually a significant improvement.
Sacramento isn't ideal as a "real city" connection, but people in the CV will take the train to Sacramento, and they'll take the train to SF via the current roundabout route, and they'll even take the bus to LA. More will go to LA or SF if good rail connections are ever made. I think tolerance for high fares will be pretty low unless there are some changes made in economic policy.
Yes, finishing the LA-Bakersfield mountain crossing is important.
Regarding "kitchen table economics", it applies well to the people of the Central Valley... but not to the California government. Governments are not like households, economically. (Neither are banks.) Failure to understand this leads to many misconceptions.