U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-14-2009, 03:55 PM
 
132 posts, read 97,198 times
Reputation: 69

Advertisements

Right now things are real bad for liberal states and real good for conservative states. I bet Massachusetts wishes it was Mississippi right now. They already have the affinity for those double S'es anyways. Liberal states are in such bad straits right now that one Mississipi dirt farm combined with an Indian Casino would instantly double the size of the New Jersey economy, according to my research.

Last edited by sandwich; 07-14-2009 at 03:56 PM.. Reason: what's it to ya
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-14-2009, 03:57 PM
 
3,288 posts, read 2,715,990 times
Reputation: 812
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandwich View Post
Right now things are real bad for liberal states and real good for conservative states. I bet Massachusetts wishes it was Mississippi right now.
You have never in your life lived in Mass and it shows.

Quote:
California's economy is bankrupt because the state is spending and not taxing. If it was raising enough tax revenue to pay for the govermnet spending, this crisis wouldn't be happening. I know that everyone thinks the whole state is full of left leaning areas like San Francisco and LA but there are many centrist and right leaning areas as well. The main reason that California has so much trouble raising revenue is because Howard Jarvis's (who is an extreme conservative even by Texas standards) prop 13 made it so that the government could only increase the property taxes of people that bought their home before 1978 by something like 1% per year and it created a rule that in order to pass a bill that raises revenue for the government, you need a 2/3rds vote in the Senate and Assembly. Therefore a small minority of right-wing Republican lawmakers are able to block any tax increase, or any other revenue raising bill for that matter, from passing.
Cue the *******s which are going to state "just spend less" when it is pretty clear things are fundamentally broken.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-14-2009, 04:00 PM
 
132 posts, read 97,198 times
Reputation: 69
No, but I do live next door to Mississippi and the economy there is so good that most of the inhabitants live in double wides made of solid gold and eat Big Macs drenched with caviar.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-14-2009, 04:04 PM
 
3,288 posts, read 2,715,990 times
Reputation: 812
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandwich View Post
No, but I do live next door to Mississippi and the economy there is so good that most of the inhabitants live in double wides made of solid gold and eat Big Macs drenched with caviar.
I am incredibly bad at detecting internet sarcasm.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-14-2009, 04:16 PM
 
Location: Palm Springs, CA
25,272 posts, read 15,454,345 times
Reputation: 6498
Well, there's more to life than a booming economy - at least for me, there is. If all someone cares about is having a big house for less money - and I acknowledge that there are many Americans for whom that is a priority - then by all means, move to Mississippi or Texas, or wherever your money goes furthest. But for many of us, the trade-offs wouldn't be worth it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-14-2009, 07:56 PM
 
Location: Austin, TX
1,046 posts, read 1,029,512 times
Reputation: 407
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnUnidentifiedMale View Post
Well, there's more to life than a booming economy - at least for me, there is. If all someone cares about is having a big house for less money - and I acknowledge that there are many Americans for whom that is a priority - then by all means, move to Mississippi or Texas, or wherever your money goes furthest. But for many of us, the trade-offs wouldn't be worth it.
Interesting to see that when liberals can't when an argument on economic policy, they revert to saying "Well, there's more to life than a booming economy." Too bad they can't just be upfront in elections and say,"our policies are disatrous for the economy, but there are more important things than a booming economy so elect us." They might not win an election but at least it would be honest.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-14-2009, 07:59 PM
 
Location: Texas
14,471 posts, read 8,194,540 times
Reputation: 3802
No suggesting that Texas and Mississippi are equal or alike, please.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-14-2009, 08:06 PM
 
Location: Palm Springs, CA
25,272 posts, read 15,454,345 times
Reputation: 6498
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdevelop2 View Post
Interesting to see that when liberals can't when an argument on economic policy, they revert to saying "Well, there's more to life than a booming economy." Too bad they can't just be upfront in elections and say,"our policies are disatrous for the economy, but there are more important things than a booming economy so elect us." They might not win an election but at least it would be honest.
I think that's an obnoxious comment.

I was just giving my honest opinion on the subject. I do believe that economic policies are important, but they're not at the top of my list. Also, I don't represent all liberals or all Democrats. Your comment suggests either that I do represent all liberals and/or Democrats or that all liberals and/or Democrats think alike; neither is true.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-14-2009, 09:29 PM
 
4,465 posts, read 4,728,610 times
Reputation: 766
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdevelop2 View Post
That is a false statement and shows that you don't even have an understanding of basic economics.

http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:...&ct=clnk&gl=us


" Unemployment in Texas jumped from 6.9% in 1982 to 8% in 1983, a period during which the national rate fell 0.1%. Much of this unemployment was among persons who came to Texas seeking jobs, particularly from northern industrial states. The rise and fall in the oil industry's fortunes affected other industries as well. Thousands of banks had speculated in real estate in the early eighties. By the late eighties, many of their investments had become worthless, and numerous banks were declared insolvent."

"Higher oil prices in 2003, following a Venezuelan oil strike and the US-led invasion of Iraq, should benefit the Texan economy."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-14-2009, 09:34 PM
 
4,465 posts, read 4,728,610 times
Reputation: 766
Also,

Be advised that Texas, as most other Southern states, export their unemployed by keeping beneifts so low as they have to either move or starve.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $84,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top