Is The South Bay/San Jose The Most Conservative in Bay Area? (2009, crime)

[sonarrat]

There isn't anywhere in the Bay Area I would call conservative. Even in San Mateo County, which has several wealthy towns run in a reactionary, anti-developmental way, the political leanings are massively Democratic. And no way would I call the South Bay conservative either.

[mysticaltyger]

Originally Posted by windhoek7

And I hate this term "fiscally conservative." What does that mean? .

Fiscally conservative politicians of any stripe are hard to find. But Republicans are the lesser evil, IMO. The US spends MORE on heath care than any other country and has nothing to show for it. The knee-jerk liberal reaction is to say it's because we need a socialist health care system. Yet more than 40% of our health care dollars already come from taxes. And even the part of the health care system that is private is hardly anything close to a true free market. Yet the knee-jerk reaction is to assume that a private market is the same thing as a free market. The two are not one and the same. Ever heard of the terms "monopoly", "duopoly", and "oligopoly"? That's what we have in the private healthe care market...severely limited competition.

We also spend about as much on education as other First World countries, and yet we don't get much for that either.

So why should we spend more on these things when we're already not getting good results with what we're already spending.

Originally Posted by windhoek7

So if you spend massive amounts on the military or give tax breaks to corporations, you're fiscal conservative? But if you want to increase spending on education & health-care, you're a "raging liberal" spender. In either of those choices, you're breaking the bank. So I wish people would stop with the labeling crap.

There is undboutedly a lot of bloat and waste in the military. But the military is a necessary evil. The liberal attitude seems to be if we just stop spending on the military, peace will naturally break out. If only that were true

[krudmonk]

"Fiscally conservative" is a distinction among many of us to not uniformly discredit all Republicans as wacko nutjobs who think Jesus talks to them. They formed an unholy (pun intended) alliance to combine their voter bases. After Sarah Palin and her juvenile ramblings, it's clear that the fiscal conservatives regret this team-up, as they should. I honestly have no problem with politicians who choose not to throw unlimited dollars at drug addicts and welfare cases.

[NorCal Dude]

most conservative= any city on 680

[sonarrat]

Originally Posted by NorCal Dude

most conservative= any city on 680

North of Fremont maybe..

[NorCal Dude]

Originally Posted by sonarrat

North of Fremont maybe..

Nah id say at fremont is where it starts. 680 by and large goes through goes through the mission san jose neighborhood, which more or less is the same as pleasanton/dublin in terms of feel and schoos and home values.

[BayDude]

Originally Posted by windhoek7

Right observation, but wrong conclusion. I live here in Madison, and we're extremely liberal with an extremely low crime rate for a city of it's size compared to a conservative city like say, Fresno, Reno, Salt Lake, or most conservative cities in the South. And I do know that Canada is more liberal, or some would say "socialistic" than the US, yet we have a much much higher crime rate than Canada. Just an observation.

Actually Madison seems to be college town is affluent and largely white. Bad example. College towns like berkeley and madison tend not only be liberal but have relatively lower crime rates (the reason being obvious, high achievers don't commit crimes).

[bigdumbgod]

Originally Posted by krudmonk

uniformly discredit all Republicans as wacko nutjobs who think Jesus talks to them..

That might be a bit of confusion - it seems to be God at least as often.

Once upon a time there lived a people who espoused fiscal conservatism from the right who were of sound mind, with a reasonable fact-based point to make that made for one side of a rational, spirited debate.

Then apparently the Earth Went Flat again.

You don't have to leave California to find this, but it helps.

[windhoek7]

Originally Posted by mysticaltyger

Fiscally conservative politicians of any stripe are hard to find. But Republicans are the lesser evil, IMO. The US spends MORE on heath care than any other country and has nothing to show for it. The knee-jerk liberal reaction is to say it's because we need a socialist health care system. Yet more than 40% of our health care dollars already come from taxes. And even the part of the health care system that is private is hardly anything close to a true free market. Yet the knee-jerk reaction is to assume that a private market is the same thing as a free market. The two are not one and the same. Ever heard of the terms "monopoly", "duopoly", and "oligopoly"? That's what we have in the private healthe care market...severely limited competition.

It's not the govt's fault that there's little competition in the insurance market. How do you think monopolies & oligopolies form in the first place? Here's a hint--by the govt doing NOTHING. If the govt did something, there wouldn't be a "so-called" free market, right?

Here's the deal. There's no such thing as a "free market" except in Somalia where there is no govt. EVERY modern industrialized country has regulation (significantly more than the US) in the marketplace. Please give an example of your "libertarian" utopia, because it doesn't exist

We also spend about as much on education as other First World countries, and yet we don't get much for that either.

If you're talking about higher education, America has the best public university system in the world Students from all over Asia, Africa, & Europe come to our schools. As far as K-12 education, there are social economic challenges in many of our urban schools, but what's the solution? ALL private education? Even suburban middle-class parents aren't pushing this nonsense. They like their public schools just as they like their medicare & social security. And many of those schools perform well, I might add.

So why should we spend more on these things when we're already not getting good results with what we're already spending.

The US spends more on health-care because the government has to go thru the middle-man, private insurance companies. That's the reason why our health-care system is so costly because "free market idealists" want to keep private industry in the picture. i.e. insurance companies. That's the whole reason why people are pushing for single-payer. It's just like medicare--no middle man, straight payment to health care providers, and better patient outcomes & satisfaction rates

There is undboutedly a lot of bloat and waste in the military. But the military is a necessary evil. The liberal attitude seems to be if we just stop spending on the military, peace will naturally break out. If only that were true

Trillion dollar military spending over the last 10 years WAS NOT a necessary evil. It was just a giveaway to defense industrialists & corporate leeches. The Cold War is over We have 10,000 nukes. Why do we still need to start unprovoked conflicts & have bases all over the world? I think military spending should be cut in half

[windhoek7]

Originally Posted by BayDude

Actually Madison seems to be college town is affluent and largely white. Bad example. College towns like berkeley and madison tend not only be liberal but have relatively lower crime rates (the reason being obvious, high achievers don't commit crimes).

You're generalizing. Madison is not all about the university. The city has 230,000 people. 20% of the population are non-white, according to the most recent census. The vast number of liberals here ARE NOT college students. They range from professionals, blue-collar workers, artists, hippies, gays, racial minorities, and people living in family oriented neighborhoods & suburbs. And if liberal cities equal more crime, you'll be seeing a lot more crime in most Canadian & European cities. And those cities are not college towns. But there is a lot of crime in many American conservative run cities--Cincinnati, Oklahoma City, Tampa, Houston, Salt Lake City, I can go on & on. Also, it seems you're admitting (just like the liberals) that the more affluent or wealthy a community or "people in a community" are, the less crimes they will commit. I will also add "more education" to the mix. So let's work on improving those things.