Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
The problem with pseudo liberal areas is they nearly always want to redistribute other peoples' incomes (generally those who push for those activities find a way to shelter their own incomes from such redistributions), creating permanent dependent classes and major disparities between the haves and have nots. The final result is a depressed middle class, a group of very rich people, and a group of entitlement minded people who demand more and more from the middle class.
Interesting perspective, and I see what you're saying. Not sure I agree though.
From what I've seen, it seems more like the conservative approach is for the wealthy to desperately clutch onto their money, not sharing it with the lower classes -- not to mention the folks doing all their hard work for them. So the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. Doesn't that pretty much describe America over the past 30 years?
I think we need to do better by the lower and middle classes. If that makes the fat cats squeal, so be it.
Do you have any stats to back up your seemingly preposterous claims that "redneck" areas have great schools and low crime rates? Or do you just hate liberals and like to make ***** up?
For example, I found census statistics which show the bottom states (by this one education measurement) to be Louisiana, Kentucky, Mississippi, Arkansas, and (gulp) WV. State Rankings--Statistical Abstract of the United States--Persons with a Bachelor's Degree or More
Wouldn't a stat that shows the precentage of people with a Degree be a bit irrelevant to the conversation whether or not the claim is factual?
Interesting perspective, and I see what you're saying. Not sure I agree though.
From what I've seen, it seems more like the conservative approach is for the wealthy to desperately clutch onto their money, not sharing it with the lower classes -- not to mention the folks doing all their hard work for them. So the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. Doesn't that pretty much describe America over the past 30 years?
I think we need to do better by the lower and middle classes. If that makes the fat cats squeal, so be it.
A new book titled "Who Really Cares" by Arthur C. Brooks examines the actual behavior of liberals and conservatives when it comes to donating their own time, money or blood for the benefit of others. It is remarkable that beliefs on this subject should have become conventional, if not set in concrete, for decades before anyone bothered to check these beliefs against facts.
What are those facts?
People who identify themselves as conservatives donate money to charity more often than people who identify themselves as liberals. They donate more money and a higher percentage of their incomes.
People who identify themselves as conservatives donate money to charity more often than people who identify themselves as liberals. They donate more money and a higher percentage of their incomes.
Ah, those tricky facts...
I think it's safe to assume (or I could go find stats if I really have to) that way more conservatives are religious than liberals are. And the problem with your assertion above is that GIVING TO RELIGIOUS ORGANIZATIONS IS CONSIDERED TO BE CHARITY.
So people simply giving money to support their own church is considered charity. Which would be OK if that money actually primarily went to people in need. But the study cited below shows that (caps mine):
"Of the estimated $101.00 billion given by all donors to religious causes, 20.1 percent ($20.28 billion) is estimated to have gone toward benevolences focused on the poor. Another 3.8 percent of the total ($3.86 billion) is estimated in benevolences contributed in response to needs in a general population and not focused specifically on the needs of people in lower income groups. THE REMAINING 76.1 PERCENT ($76.86 BILLION) WENT TO CONGREGATIONAL OPERATIONS."
I sense the resentment and anger in your response. I dont know why, as it
was not my intention to offend you. Everyone's lawn DOES NOT have to be
"Beverly Hills" manicured. You took it from one extreme to another. It just the
pictures I have seen along Main St of War, Bradshaw and Northfolk, looked
downright sad and depressing, to me. Im even surprised that internet access
is even available in McDowell County.
It is obvious that they have educated people in West Virginia that know how to correctly punctuate their sentences. You need to recheck yours, though.
As someone who has spend many years living in one of the most liberal of liberal areas, I can fully attest to the weakness of the overall education system found in such places. Generally, such areas have super hyped liberal arts orientations but are grossly deficient in terms of real life educational opportunities.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CTMountaineer
Not everyone is cut out to be a lawyer. I have four children. Three of them are professionals. The fourth one is not at all academically inclined. When he moved in with me at age 16, transferring from a high school near Moundsville, WV to one near Danbury, CT he was in for a real culture shock. The first person with whom he spoke was a bozo who identified himself as a guidance counselor. This individual assessed my son's background and quickly determined that he would have trouble designing an educational program for him. My son wanted real training in skilled trades.
When the incompetent moron posing as a counselor asked him what training he had at West Virginia, my son told him that the previous year his vocational class had constructed a home from the ground up, then they sold it using the proceeds to finance the next year's project. The supposedly superior school in Connecticut only had one course in the building trades...
building maintenance. They had a course that trained people to change light bulbs and light switches, and how to operate a carpet scrubber.
The problem with pseudo liberal areas is they nearly always want to redistribute other peoples' incomes (generally those who push for those activities find a way to shelter their own incomes from such redistributions), creating permanent dependent classes and major disparities between the haves and have nots. The final result is a depressed middle class, a group of very rich people, and a group of entitlement minded people who demand more and more from the middle class.
So let me get this right, because Danbury didn’t offer vocational training in school it can now be lumped into the category of a liberal bastion that trained people only in taking other people’s money?? HMMMM… am I missing something. It appears that the school your son attended focused on the service sector (which is quite natural as the city is considered a suburb of NY). Schools now must focus on the training of individuals to deal with today’s economy. Manufacturing is yesterday and will not come back magically because we wish. Service is here, consequently today’s children must be trained in the hard core science and math fields. Additionally schools increasingly must do more with less necessitating a strict focus on training and course materials that will get these kids work. A focus on such does not equate to liberalism, it does however equate to a honest assessment of today’s overall economy and the options available to those entering today’s work force.
I think it's safe to assume (or I could go find stats if I really have to) that way more conservatives are religious than liberals are. And the problem with your assertion above is that GIVING TO RELIGIOUS ORGANIZATIONS IS CONSIDERED TO BE CHARITY.
So people simply giving money to support their own church is considered charity. Which would be OK if that money actually primarily went to people in need. But the study cited below shows that (caps mine):
All non profits have high overhead costs and are a tricky thing considering that few accurately report their costs.
THE VISCIOUS CYCLE
The first step is understanding the forces that form and drive the vicious cycle. Here’s how it works:
•Misleading reporting: The majority of nonprofits under-report overhead on tax forms and in fundraising materials.
•Unrealistic expectations: Donors tend to reward organizations with the “leanest” profiles. They also skew their funding towards programmatic activities.
•Pressure to conform: Nonprofit leaders feel pressure to conform to funders’ expectations by spending as little as possible on overhead, and by reporting lower-than-actual overhead rates. (Figure 1 illustrates the cycle.)
"Of the estimated $101.00 billion given by all donors to religious causes, 20.1 percent ($20.28 billion) is estimated to have gone toward benevolences focused on the poor. Another 3.8 percent of the total ($3.86 billion) is estimated in benevolences contributed in response to needs in a general population and not focused specifically on the needs of people in lower income groups. THE REMAINING 76.1 PERCENT ($76.86 BILLION) WENT TO CONGREGATIONAL OPERATIONS."
So much for the great "charity" of the conservatives...
This also only counts the portion gave the church. One would have to do some digging but do you know if this covers 5% or 50% of what is claimed to have been donated by conservatives? It would make a major difference would it not?
This also only counts the portion gave the church. One would have to do some digging but do you know if this covers 5% or 50% of what is claimed to have been donated by conservatives? It would make a major difference would it not?
Nope, don't know offhand. Yup, it would make a difference.
It would also be good to know what percentage of religious folks are in fact conservative/liberal.
Dig away, buddy! Of course, I'm sure both a liberal and a conservative could come up with two fairly different answers (to pretty much any question!), with proper studies cited and all that.
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.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
Of course, I'm sure both a liberal and a conservative could come up with two fairly different answers (to pretty much any question!), with proper studies cited and all that.
