You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
- Smoking Guns
- Rep: 330
Re: US Politics Thread
I am sick of hearing this moocher State shit and how they are all republican. Fucking bullshit.
http://www.thecitizenscholars.com/artic … d-welfare/
This is a good article. Democrats, do you ever think some of this aid is given Democrats that may live in a Red State? There are a lot of very poor DEMOCRATS in Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi, etc. but when you figure cost of living, New York becomes more poor per person than some of these same Southern or Red States the Dems claim are mooching.
- Smoking Guns
- Rep: 330
Re: US Politics Thread
I am sick of hearing this moocher State shit and how they are all republican. Fucking bullshit.
http://www.thecitizenscholars.com/artic … d-welfare/
This is a good article. Democrats, do you ever think some of this aid is given Democrats that may live in a Red State? There are a lot of very poor DEMOCRATS in Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi, etc. but when you figure cost of living, New York becomes more poor per person than some of these same Southern or Red States the Dems claim are mooching.
Perhaps the Dems from RICH blue states are wanting to do welfare reform so they don’t have to give so much if their money to poor people in states not called New York, New Jersey, California. Who would have ever thought these hypocrite mother fuckers would be bitching about redistribution of wealth. Unfucking believeable.
Re: US Politics Thread
If you want to talk about allocations of federal dollars, this is where we need to start.
https://ijr.com/2015/230371/230371-2-ma … deceiving/
I much prefer analysis that deals with the raw numbers....
What your article points out that is misleading is that they don’t actually speak to the actual number of voters in each category analyzed. You’re saying wow...81 percent of people on welfare vote for non-republicans. I’m surprised it isn’t more quite frankly.
But how many people are there on welfare? 1000? 10000? It’s intentionaly misleading like when a cancer study says you’re 3 times more likely to get cancer if you do this. Well what if it’s 3 Times .005? Or 3 times .5. That fucking matters.
Truth be told...all the states that get shit for their liberal leanings send way more in than they get back.
In addition, i find it absurd for anyone to complain about the paltry sun of money spent on food stamps (btw, it costs more to drug test these people than it does in money spent on food) when we consistently justify enormous, laughable sums of money on endless wars with no real pragmatic objective.
- Smoking Guns
- Rep: 330
Re: US Politics Thread
If you want to talk about allocations of federal dollars, this is where we need to start.
https://ijr.com/2015/230371/230371-2-ma … deceiving/
I much prefer analysis that deals with the raw numbers....
What your article points out that is misleading is that they don’t actually speak to the actual number of voters in each category analyzed. You’re saying wow...81 percent of people on welfare vote for non-republicans. I’m surprised it isn’t more quite frankly.
But how many people are there on welfare? 1000? 10000? It’s intentionaly misleading like when a cancer study says you’re 3 times more likely to get cancer if you do this. Well what if it’s 3 Times .005? Or 3 times .5. That fucking matters.
Truth be told...all the states that get shit for their liberal leanings send way more in than they get back.
In addition, i find it absurd for anyone to complain about the paltry sun of money spent on food stamps (btw, it costs more to drug test these people than it does in money spent on food) when we consistently justify enormous, laughable sums of money on endless wars with no real pragmatic objective.
That article is more in line my article than different. Of course New York and California pay more. They are extremely wealthy states with huge populations. So economies of scale come into play as well. But I think we kind of agree on this. I just don’t like the “mooching” states bullshit I keep seeing.
Re: US Politics Thread
mitchejw wrote:If you want to talk about allocations of federal dollars, this is where we need to start.
https://ijr.com/2015/230371/230371-2-ma … deceiving/
I much prefer analysis that deals with the raw numbers....
What your article points out that is misleading is that they don’t actually speak to the actual number of voters in each category analyzed. You’re saying wow...81 percent of people on welfare vote for non-republicans. I’m surprised it isn’t more quite frankly.
But how many people are there on welfare? 1000? 10000? It’s intentionaly misleading like when a cancer study says you’re 3 times more likely to get cancer if you do this. Well what if it’s 3 Times .005? Or 3 times .5. That fucking matters.
Truth be told...all the states that get shit for their liberal leanings send way more in than they get back.
In addition, i find it absurd for anyone to complain about the paltry sun of money spent on food stamps (btw, it costs more to drug test these people than it does in money spent on food) when we consistently justify enormous, laughable sums of money on endless wars with no real pragmatic objective.
That article is more in line my article than different. Of course New York and California pay more. They are extremely wealthy states with huge populations. So economies of scale come into play as well. But I think we kind of agree on this. I just don’t like the “mooching” states bullshit I keep seeing.
Here’s the best map:
Re: US Politics Thread
mitchejw wrote:If you want to talk about allocations of federal dollars, this is where we need to start.
https://ijr.com/2015/230371/230371-2-ma … deceiving/
I much prefer analysis that deals with the raw numbers....
What your article points out that is misleading is that they don’t actually speak to the actual number of voters in each category analyzed. You’re saying wow...81 percent of people on welfare vote for non-republicans. I’m surprised it isn’t more quite frankly.
But how many people are there on welfare? 1000? 10000? It’s intentionaly misleading like when a cancer study says you’re 3 times more likely to get cancer if you do this. Well what if it’s 3 Times .005? Or 3 times .5. That fucking matters.
Truth be told...all the states that get shit for their liberal leanings send way more in than they get back.
In addition, i find it absurd for anyone to complain about the paltry sun of money spent on food stamps (btw, it costs more to drug test these people than it does in money spent on food) when we consistently justify enormous, laughable sums of money on endless wars with no real pragmatic objective.
That article is more in line my article than different. Of course New York and California pay more. They are extremely wealthy states with huge populations. So economies of scale come into play as well. But I think we kind of agree on this. I just don’t like the “mooching” states bullshit I keep seeing.
Here’s how i look at it SG...it’s welfare money that subsidies states with shitty employment practices and protections.
When an employer pays a wage that is sub-poverty level the feds tend to send more money to subsidize those areas of depression. The problem is it allows the bad practices to continue....but what cane first? The chicken or the egg.
The point is...whether this happens in Alabama or NY...it’s a shame....i don’t care what state it’s in....it’s a problem
- Smoking Guns
- Rep: 330
Re: US Politics Thread
Smoking Guns wrote:mitchejw wrote:If you want to talk about allocations of federal dollars, this is where we need to start.
https://ijr.com/2015/230371/230371-2-ma … deceiving/
I much prefer analysis that deals with the raw numbers....
What your article points out that is misleading is that they don’t actually speak to the actual number of voters in each category analyzed. You’re saying wow...81 percent of people on welfare vote for non-republicans. I’m surprised it isn’t more quite frankly.
But how many people are there on welfare? 1000? 10000? It’s intentionaly misleading like when a cancer study says you’re 3 times more likely to get cancer if you do this. Well what if it’s 3 Times .005? Or 3 times .5. That fucking matters.
Truth be told...all the states that get shit for their liberal leanings send way more in than they get back.
In addition, i find it absurd for anyone to complain about the paltry sun of money spent on food stamps (btw, it costs more to drug test these people than it does in money spent on food) when we consistently justify enormous, laughable sums of money on endless wars with no real pragmatic objective.
That article is more in line my article than different. Of course New York and California pay more. They are extremely wealthy states with huge populations. So economies of scale come into play as well. But I think we kind of agree on this. I just don’t like the “mooching” states bullshit I keep seeing.
Here’s how i look at it SG...it’s welfare money that subsidies states with shitty employment practices and protections.
When an employer pays a wage that is sub-poverty level the feds tend to send more money to subsidize those areas of depression. The problem is it allows the bad practices to continue....but what cane first? The chicken or the egg.
The point is...whether this happens in Alabama or NY...it’s a shame....i don’t care what state it’s in....it’s a problem
Yes, I agree, but it is the shit the folks from NY and NJ keep saying that rubs me raw. They keep saying that "Alabama and Mississippi are mooching off of us etc". Really rich of them to talk about poor southern states that were gutted from the civil war and shit not being on the same level as the state of New York, or New Jersey, or California. Then the host says, "why do you think so many people are moving out of New Jersey" and the guest from New Jersey said, "Our taxes are too high". Like what the fuck. He agrees his state's taxes are too high and then complains that others states that don't have as high of taxes are mooching of them.
- Smoking Guns
- Rep: 330
Re: US Politics Thread
mitchejw wrote:Smoking Guns wrote:That article is more in line my article than different. Of course New York and California pay more. They are extremely wealthy states with huge populations. So economies of scale come into play as well. But I think we kind of agree on this. I just don’t like the “mooching” states bullshit I keep seeing.
Here’s how i look at it SG...it’s welfare money that subsidies states with shitty employment practices and protections.
When an employer pays a wage that is sub-poverty level the feds tend to send more money to subsidize those areas of depression. The problem is it allows the bad practices to continue....but what cane first? The chicken or the egg.
The point is...whether this happens in Alabama or NY...it’s a shame....i don’t care what state it’s in....it’s a problem
They keep saying that "Alabama and Mississippi are mooching off of us etc". Really rich of them to talk about poor southern states that were gutted from the civil war and shit not being on the same level as the state of New York, or New Jersey, or California..
Just want to point out that the argument that black people are still recovering from the Civil War (slavery) has been met with unenthusiastic response around here, maybe even you I don't remember, but you are arguing entire states haven't recovered fully from the Civil War.
Could be true.
Re: US Politics Thread
mitchejw wrote:Smoking Guns wrote:That article is more in line my article than different. Of course New York and California pay more. They are extremely wealthy states with huge populations. So economies of scale come into play as well. But I think we kind of agree on this. I just don’t like the “mooching” states bullshit I keep seeing.
Here’s how i look at it SG...it’s welfare money that subsidies states with shitty employment practices and protections.
When an employer pays a wage that is sub-poverty level the feds tend to send more money to subsidize those areas of depression. The problem is it allows the bad practices to continue....but what cane first? The chicken or the egg.
The point is...whether this happens in Alabama or NY...it’s a shame....i don’t care what state it’s in....it’s a problem
Yes, I agree, but it is the shit the folks from NY and NJ keep saying that rubs me raw. They keep saying that "Alabama and Mississippi are mooching off of us etc". Really rich of them to talk about poor southern states that were gutted from the civil war and shit not being on the same level as the state of New York, or New Jersey, or California. Then the host says, "why do you think so many people are moving out of New Jersey" and the guest from New Jersey said, "Our taxes are too high". Like what the fuck. He agrees his state's taxes are too high and then complains that others states that don't have as high of taxes are mooching of them.
What are we talking about here? State taxes or federal taxes?
