I wonder how successful this could be if it were nationwide. I also wonder how many 'representatives' in the local governments would try to shut it down to prevent it from crippling their ability to skim from local budgets. I'm pretty sure it would return a lot of discretionary control to the people who are directly affected in each given area but also prevent (or greatly complicate) local 'leaders' from mis-appropriating or otherwise allocating funds from one area to another in order to evict some and create more opportunity for others (often, the former being poor and the latter being rich). It also seems that this corruption with the way things are now actually fuels the increasing gap between the poor-middle-upper classes. This seems to be a much better way to prevent corruption and promote fairer oversight of community rehabilitation and improvement. There is definitely no down side to that. It would allow those in communities that are struggling the most to maintain an environment that allows them a greater opportunity to benefit the overall city, state and nation while reigning in that corruption. Isn't 'the inability to remain productive' what so many people complain about when they point out these poor neighborhoods (that are often getting thrown under the bus and railroaded by gold-digging reps who steal the funds they need to be productive, rather than assisted in order to flourish)? Surely, it doesn't take a brain surgeon to understand this. Everyone with a brain knows thiat what is going on now is wrong and, if they believe otherwise, it is no doubt due to some bias, fear, self-importance, selfishness or other equally disturbing (sub)human quality. I suspect it only takes a heart/compassion...and morality/ethics to understand. Ultimately, I believe the world will be divided between those who are hedonistic and those who are altruistic. It is, after all, what causes so many terrible ills in society, these days - political specifics notwithstanding. When that time comes, I certainly hope people are standing on the correct side of that dividing line, since nobody will have any compassion and/or sympathy for those who have none for others and, if it ever becomes the 'litmus test' for 'who gets to live and who gets to die/go to prison/get deported...I'll bet it'll become a lot more important to those who don't really seem to care right now. 😉

I wonder how successful this could be if it were nationwide. I also wonder how many 'representatives' in the local governments would try to shut it down to prevent it from crippling their ability to skim from local budgets. I'm pretty sure it would return a lot of discretionary control to the people who are directly affected in each given area but also prevent (or greatly complicate) local 'leaders' from mis-appropriating or otherwise allocating funds from one area to another in order to evict some and create more opportunity for others (often, the former being poor and the latter being rich). It also seems that this corruption with the way things are now actually fuels the increasing gap between the poor-middle-upper classes. This seems to be a much better way to prevent corruption and promote fairer oversight of community rehabilitation and improvement. There is definitely no down side to that. It would allow those in communities that are struggling the most to maintain an environment that allows them a greater opportunity to benefit the overall city, state and nation while reigning in that corruption. Isn't 'the inability to remain productive' what so many people complain about when they point out these poor neighborhoods (that are often getting thrown under the bus and railroaded by gold-digging reps who steal the funds they need to be productive, rather than assisted in order to flourish)? Surely, it doesn't take a brain surgeon to understand this. Everyone with a brain knows thiat what is going on now is wrong and, if they believe otherwise, it is no doubt due to some bias, fear, self-importance, selfishness or other equally disturbing (sub)human quality. I suspect it only takes a heart/compassion...and morality/ethics to understand. Ultimately, I believe the world will be divided between those who are hedonistic and those who are altruistic. It is, after all, what causes so many terrible ills in society, these days - political specifics notwithstanding. When that time comes, I certainly hope people are standing on the correct side of that dividing line, since nobody will have any compassion and/or sympathy for those who have none for others and, if it ever becomes the 'litmus test' for 'who gets to live and who gets to die/go to prison/get deported...I'll bet it'll become a lot more important to those who don't really seem to care right now. 😉 - Participatory budgeting is an experiment in grassroots democracy that gives citizens partial control of a municipal budget.