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.
And you dont comprehend well, do you?
I asked for hard statistical data, I dont need anyone to "interpret" said data for me.
Thank you for proving beyond the shadow of a doubt the intellectual capacity of whatever urban group it is you belong in.
I read very well. You disparage, likely the most objective, respected, (on both sides) newspapers in the country. You're a right wing lemming. No evidence will convince you.
I read very well. You disparage, likely the most objective, respected, (on both sides) newspapers in the country. You're a right wing lemming. Know evidence will convince you.
Lol, I'm soooooooo NOT a right winger.
Epic fail.
Try again.
Lets try this again.......where exactly is the statistical data I asked for?
Cant find it?
No honey, you only know the tiny little slice of OK you are from.
I also never said that rural is better, dont attempt to put words in my mouth.
You seem to have a huge perception, as well as comprehension problem going on here.
No. I'm from Southlake Texas. Look it up. We made the news a few weeks ago. I've got a great idea how urban dwellers compare to rural "good ole folks"...lol
The idea that rural people want less government intrusion is B.S.
Rural areas are MOST dependent on government assistance in the form of Medicaid, Social Security, agricultural subsidies.
Rural people look for right wing authoritarian leaders to tell them what to believe. ....that's why they can badmouth government on one hand....and be the most dependent on government programs on the other.
Red rural States take in more from the Federal budget than they pay back in taxes. Blue urban States pay more in taxes to the Federal government than the Government spends in their States.
That whole red state/blue state welfare meme is simply garbage.
Sure, Wyoming takes in more money than it pays out. But it's not because people are on the dole. It's because a mile of highway isn't going to cost less in Wyoming than it does in Massachusetts. It's because when your population is more spread out, it costs the government more to implement programs, to reach the population the program is targeting. For instance, you want to innoculate the population for the flu or some other infection, in the city you can set up a center and have people come to you. One nurse can innoculate thousands of people. But in a rural area, you are fighting schedules and transporation issues. One nurse set up in a center may end up only innoculating a dozen people. A nurse traveling place to place might have better results in the number of innoculations, but it costs more for her because of transportation. The end result is that each innoculation costs more in a rural setting versus an urban setting.
I own a farm in Jefferson County Oklahoma where my family is from. One of the most impoverished majority white counties in the State and the Nation. It's towns are filled with white's on welfare, with a few extremely wealthy ranchers/farmers who own all the land. Meth labs, burglaries are a big problem as well. I know rural. So don't give me this rural people are better Americans crap.
But your posts that suggest that urban people are better are not crap?
No. I'm from Southlake Texas. Look it up. We made the news a few weeks ago. I've got a great idea how urban dwellers compare to rural "good ole folks"...lol
That whole red state/blue state welfare meme is simply garbage.
Sure, Wyoming takes in more money than it pays out. But it's not because people are on the dole. It's because a mile of highway isn't going to cost less in Wyoming than it does in Massachusetts. It's because when your population is more spread out, it costs the government more to implement programs, to reach the population the program is targeting. For instance, you want to innoculate the population for the flu or some other infection, in the city you can set up a center and have people come to you. One nurse can innoculate thousands of people. But in a rural area, you are fighting schedules and transporation issues. One nurse set up in a center may end up only innoculating a dozen people. A nurse traveling place to place might have better results in the number of innoculations, but it costs more for her because of transportation. The end result is that each innoculation costs more in a rural setting versus an urban setting.
Certainly there are outliers, and special cases but all in all the evidence speaks for itself. I'm be embarrassed too if I claimed white, right wing voters are the most independent and self sufficient and then this data comes along.
Certainly there are outliers, and special cases but all in all the evidence speaks for itself. I'm be embarrassed too if I claimed white, right wing voters are the most independent and self sufficient and then this data comes along.
You are much too subtle for me. How exactly are you rebutting my argument? Why should I be embarrassed? Where in my post did I talk about white, right-wing voters at all?
My argument is that people vote for their own self-interests. Rural and urban citizens vote for their interests. Many rural residents do not benefit from a wide swath of government programs, and balk at their tax dollars going towards those programs. From an urban perspective that may seem anti-government, but it's not anti-government. It's just people who don't think they should share the burden of costs for programs that don't benefit them. It's in the self-interest of urbanites to get rural citizens to help pay for urban projects because it lowers their own costs. It's not in the self-interest of rural citizens. And so urbanites re-cast the argument as anti-government versus pro-government, when that's not the real underlying issue.
You are much too subtle for me. How exactly are you rebutting my argument? Why should I be embarrassed? Where in my post did I talk about white, right-wing voters at all?
My argument is that people vote for their own self-interests. Rural and urban citizens vote for their interests. Many rural residents do not benefit from a wide swath of government programs, and balk at their tax dollars going towards those programs. From an urban perspective that may seem anti-government, but it's not anti-government. It's just people who don't think they should share the burden of costs for programs that don't benefit them. It's in the self-interest of urbanites to get rural citizens to help pay for urban projects because it lowers their own costs. It's not in the self-interest of rural citizens. And so urbanites re-cast the argument as anti-government versus pro-government, when that's not the real underlying issue.
I wasn't referring to "you" in the literal sense.
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.
