alt Hacker NewsThis is a recipe for creating dead retiree states. Just NIMBY everything, NIMBY the power sources[1] [2], then complain about a lack of power so NIMBY any type of new industrial <anything>.
Now do this for housing, new sources of water anything a person younger than 40 would need and you basically get a state full of retirees..and oh would you look at that! [3].
Now the question is, why wouldn't all states eventually do this with the way our population pyramid is looking? It's basically rabid conservation and tragedy of the commons writ large.
[1]: https://www.mainepublic.org/politics/2025-04-08/bill-removin...
[2]: https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/maine-voters-reject-q...
[3]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territ...
Replies
It's the opposite of NIMBY. It's smart thoughtful policy and it is NOT a simple ban. Nobody bothers to read passed the title but the main piece of this legislation is the creation of the Maine Data Center Coordination Council.
Alongside it is a temporary (until Nov 2027) moratorium on data centers over 20 megawatts. This seems to be in place so they could establish a proper legal and environmental framework for building out data centers in the future.
This is exactly the kind of approach to legislation we should all hope our local representatives are competent enough to do.
Maine is far from being a nimby state, apart from the 30% expansion rule for houses <250ft from water, there is basically no zoning across the entire state and a fly by night hot dog diner could go up next to your million dollar cottage if it wanted to.
California on the other hand… but they are clearly far from becoming a “dead state”
Data centers bring in less jobs than tourism. They don't grow the tax base.
All you get is ugly industrial sprawl.
Its race to the bottom not nimby.
Is your argument that we should ignore the will of the people? Because this is what the people of Maine want. Why exactly should Maine be forced to have data centers in it when its citizens don't want that?
[dead]
> This is a recipe for creating dead retiree states.
Good news: lots of choice.
I don't have a problem with NIMS -- which isn't the same as NIMBY. It's one of the reasons the US is a federation.
Are TX and AZ really dead retiree states…as an example of states recognized as more business friendly? I work in a heavily-per state-regulated industry. Some states have regulations that increase the cost to do business there, and so we will (1) never have offices there and (2) those states get products last if at all. I also see tons of jobs being created in TX and AZ.