Board index » Word on the Street... » News & Debate




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 814 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 37, 38, 39, 40, 41
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: 2012 Presidential Election
PostPosted: Sat Nov 10, 2012 3:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Unthought Known
 Profile

Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 4:49 pm
Posts: 9495
Location: Richie-Richville, Maryland
turned2black wrote:


That seems like a measured and rational response in the sense that this guy realizes he is part of the problem and is taking steps to get the f*ck away from the rest of us.


*Most actual Libertarians don't support a "strong military" in the context that this blog uses the term. (Party leaders have suggested cutting the defense budget by up to 50%.) "Strong military" is a term for a non-Christian neo-con to use to justify outrageous spending and wars on poor people.

_________________
you get a lifetime, that's it.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: 2012 Presidential Election
PostPosted: Sat Nov 10, 2012 7:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Master of Meh
 Profile

Joined: Fri May 19, 2006 11:00 pm
Posts: 13226
Location: Adelaide, AUS
¡B! wrote:
When Bush won and all of us liberals said we were moving to Canada, Australia ... whatnot ... where do Republicans threaten to move to? What country is the conservative ideal?

This has been doing the rounds over here quite a bit:

Image

Often followed by:

Image


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: 2012 Presidential Election
PostPosted: Mon Nov 12, 2012 2:42 am 
Offline
User avatar
too drunk to moderate properly
 WWW  Profile

Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 7:19 pm
Posts: 39068
Location: Chapel Hill, NC, USA
Gender: Male
simple schoolboy wrote:
broken iris wrote:
¡B! wrote:
When Bush won and all of us liberals said we were moving to Canada, Australia ... whatnot ... where do Republicans threaten to move to? What country is the conservative ideal?


Texas or Singapore


I think on most metrics Canada is freer than the US. Including economic considerations. Republicans can move to Canada too. Their healthcare system is probably less intrusive than Obama care. They probably don't make the Catholic church pay for abortions, for instance


They don't make any organization cover abortions because they're single payer.

_________________
"Though some may think there should be a separation between art/music and politics, it should be reinforced that art can be a form of nonviolent protest." - e.v.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: 2012 Presidential Election
PostPosted: Mon Nov 12, 2012 3:20 am 
Offline
User avatar
Unthought Known
 Profile

Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2004 1:54 am
Posts: 7189
Location: CA
¡B! wrote:
simple schoolboy wrote:
broken iris wrote:
¡B! wrote:
When Bush won and all of us liberals said we were moving to Canada, Australia ... whatnot ... where do Republicans threaten to move to? What country is the conservative ideal?


Texas or Singapore


I think on most metrics Canada is freer than the US. Including economic considerations. Republicans can move to Canada too. Their healthcare system is probably less intrusive than Obama care. They probably don't make the Catholic church pay for abortions, for instance


They don't make any organization cover abortions because they're single payer.


I'm not saying that is ideal, but that does sound less intrusive than a penaltax with the addition of blatantly violating freedom of conscience, wouldn't you say?


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: 2012 Presidential Election
PostPosted: Mon Nov 12, 2012 11:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Reissued
 WWW  Profile

Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2004 3:38 pm
Posts: 20059
Gender: Male
simple schoolboy wrote:
¡B! wrote:
simple schoolboy wrote:
broken iris wrote:
¡B! wrote:
When Bush won and all of us liberals said we were moving to Canada, Australia ... whatnot ... where do Republicans threaten to move to? What country is the conservative ideal?


Texas or Singapore


I think on most metrics Canada is freer than the US. Including economic considerations. Republicans can move to Canada too. Their healthcare system is probably less intrusive than Obama care. They probably don't make the Catholic church pay for abortions, for instance


They don't make any organization cover abortions because they're single payer.


I'm not saying that is ideal, but that does sound less intrusive than a penaltax with the addition of blatantly violating freedom of conscience, wouldn't you say?

I agree with this, but I don't think single payer was feasible in the US at the time (and less so now).

_________________
stop light plays its part, so I would say you've got a part


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: 2012 Presidential Election
PostPosted: Wed Nov 28, 2012 1:10 am 
Offline
User avatar
Reissued
 WWW  Profile

Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2004 3:38 pm
Posts: 20059
Gender: Male
How "the takers" voted:
Image





Republican-heavy counties eat up most food stamp growth

_________________
stop light plays its part, so I would say you've got a part


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: 2012 Presidential Election
PostPosted: Wed Nov 28, 2012 4:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar
too drunk to moderate properly
 WWW  Profile

Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 7:19 pm
Posts: 39068
Location: Chapel Hill, NC, USA
Gender: Male
dkfan9 wrote:


Maybe those citizens feel guilty about the amount of federal dollars they take, and they strive to be more self-sufficient.

_________________
"Though some may think there should be a separation between art/music and politics, it should be reinforced that art can be a form of nonviolent protest." - e.v.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: 2012 Presidential Election
PostPosted: Wed Nov 28, 2012 10:33 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Reissued
 WWW  Profile

Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2004 3:38 pm
Posts: 20059
Gender: Male
¡B! wrote:
dkfan9 wrote:


Maybe those citizens feel guilty about the amount of federal dollars they take, and they strive to be more self-sufficient.

That's probably largely true. On the other hand, it undercuts Romney's "handout" bullshit on why he lost the election---it shows people aren't all voting for the most selfish reasons.

_________________
stop light plays its part, so I would say you've got a part


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: 2012 Presidential Election
PostPosted: Wed Nov 28, 2012 11:33 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Unthought Known
 Profile

Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 4:49 pm
Posts: 9495
Location: Richie-Richville, Maryland
dkfan9 wrote:
¡B! wrote:
dkfan9 wrote:


Maybe those citizens feel guilty about the amount of federal dollars they take, and they strive to be more self-sufficient.

That's probably largely true. On the other hand, it undercuts Romney's "handout" bullshit on why he lost the election---it shows people aren't all voting for the most selfish reasons.



Well, what are we really looking at? I find it hard to believe that federal taxes from NY has offset the cost of TARP bailouts to the banks on Wall Street and the federal services in the state. It may be useful to see income disparity mapped over the same timeframe to see if wealth concentrations in Cali and the NE are distorting this.

_________________
you get a lifetime, that's it.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: 2012 Presidential Election
PostPosted: Thu Nov 29, 2012 5:15 am 
Offline
User avatar
Reissued
 WWW  Profile

Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2004 3:38 pm
Posts: 20059
Gender: Male
broken iris wrote:
dkfan9 wrote:
¡B! wrote:
dkfan9 wrote:


Maybe those citizens feel guilty about the amount of federal dollars they take, and they strive to be more self-sufficient.

That's probably largely true. On the other hand, it undercuts Romney's "handout" bullshit on why he lost the election---it shows people aren't all voting for the most selfish reasons.



Well, what are we really looking at? I find it hard to believe that federal taxes from NY has offset the cost of TARP bailouts to the banks on Wall Street and the federal services in the state. It may be useful to see income disparity mapped over the same timeframe to see if wealth concentrations in Cali and the NE are distorting this.

I bet you're right that it doesn't take into account TARP funds (Not sure, as far as I can tell the pic sans Obama logos comes from The Economist, a fairly centrist but pro-finance mag). But otherwise, it's federal taxes paid vs. federal spending received.

_________________
stop light plays its part, so I would say you've got a part


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: 2012 Presidential Election
PostPosted: Thu Nov 29, 2012 4:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Unthought Known
 Profile

Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 12:47 pm
Posts: 9282
Location: Atlanta
Gender: Male
The reddest areas are coincidentally the states in the union that are generally the poorest or have the biggest gaps in wealth.

Coal Mining mostly in West Va so they voted for thier jobs essentially.

Mississippi is trying to ramp up manufacturing, but in general it's just an extremely poor state.

_________________
Attention Phenylketonurics: Contains Phenylalanine


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: 2012 Presidential Election
PostPosted: Thu Nov 29, 2012 4:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Unthought Known
 Profile

Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 4:49 pm
Posts: 9495
Location: Richie-Richville, Maryland
The standout is California. The state is hugely indebted, but a net giver to the feds?

_________________
you get a lifetime, that's it.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: 2012 Presidential Election
PostPosted: Fri Nov 30, 2012 7:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Unthought Known
 Profile

Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 12:47 pm
Posts: 9282
Location: Atlanta
Gender: Male
broken iris wrote:
The standout is California. The state is hugely indebted, but a net giver to the feds?



We know they spend spectacular amounts of money but likely the volume of extremely wealthy federal taxpayers in that state offsets the federal expenditures anyway.

As is so common, we see choropleth maps with very little data provided as to how they arrived at said conclusions.

_________________
Attention Phenylketonurics: Contains Phenylalanine


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: 2012 Presidential Election
PostPosted: Fri Nov 30, 2012 11:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Supersonic
 Profile

Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 2:43 am
Posts: 10694
Yeah, okay. Red states and Republicans are the problem. Draw your own conclusions.

Image

Image

Image

The reddest states actually have the lowest welfare rolls. The south, on the other hand, is loaded with poor minorities who voted Democrat, and carried Democrat counties.

I find those charts about who's a net contributor to the tax base to be dubious. Do you suppose the auto bailout is factored in? Or the bank bailouts? Do you suppose quantitative easing is taken into account? How about defense spending?

Image

Do you think that's all factored in there?

This last election was a measure of a few things: Which counties are reliant on income from the feds - which aren't.

The states with the best employment right now? The Dakotas, Nebraska, Kansas, Utah, Wyoming, The worst states? All those net contributing blue states, that are all bankrupt.

I'd REALLY like to know the methodology of how they crunch those numbers.

_________________
Its a Wonderful Life


Top
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 814 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 37, 38, 39, 40, 41

Board index » Word on the Street... » News & Debate


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
It is currently Mon Oct 23, 2017 8:09 am