Nailed it, Sherman. I do have a problem with the “ lots of private philanthropy” part, though (I will be alone on this item forever, but bear with me for a bit). To me, from a land use and labor standpoint, it isn’t that the rich got so rich that they have money to ‘give’ away, but that when you think about all of the other things you mentioned that start with “local”, you have to realize that the wealth and resources that the rich put into foreign banks, then luxuries, then stocks, THEN philanthropy to avoid income taxes, first come out of the ground and leave the local resource pattern before local people can use those resources to reinforce local systems (economic and natural). I have no problem with people being rich per se: I do have a problem with resources being taken out of the ground for negative usefulness as a societal methodology: consumptionism, pollution, enforced competitive poverty, competitive fanaticisms, luxury religions (worshiping imaginary beings instead of gathering people for useful group purposes), distraction and fuel for cars to go to jobs to buy cars to go to jobs.
Neither Republicans or Democrats want to truly keep resources local for local people. They’re all about creating money, jobs and ‘growth’ in a perpetual, unwinnable war on the planet, with some imagined ‘technology’ that will pull humanity’s ass out of the fire (literally).