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.
As for regressive taxes, since it seems the people on this thread can't even agree how to define "regressive,"
No disagreement necessary. There actually is a definition.
Regressive tax: A tax that takes a larger percentage from low-income people than from high-income people. Regressive Tax Definition | Investopedia
That IS the point. No, what I'm claiming is that minorities and the poor are worse off in blue states than they are in red states. Blue states have wider income gaps and more racially segregated schools.
But that's simply not what the data reveals:
1) Northern schools are not "segregated" racially: I don't see the big deal here - if everyone happens to live - by choice - in mono-racial neighborhoods, resulting in mono-racial schools, what difference does it make? Would the schools of the north be improved by randomly busing in people from all over the place to make each school more "ethnically diverse?" Heck, that sounds like the type of stuff that gets blasted as "liberal!" around here! If people are not being forbidden to attend a public school because of skin color, religion, or whatever, than the situation is fine, even if the end result is schools with little ethnic diversity.
Now, one could make an argument that there are a lot of poor blacks stuck in poor schools in the north, and I'll give you that, but that is not because of race or "liberals" or anything else like that - the blacks moved to cities with jobs. Then - thanks to bad policies on BOTH sides of the aisle - the jobs vanished, leaving a lot of poor blacks stranded in the crumbling cities. There's more to it than that, of course, but the problems are not caused by a lack of whites in black schools or blacks in white schools.
2) Income inequality does NOT measure how well-off the poor are: If a poor person in some state is dirt poor, working minimum wage, and depending upon social safety nets to survive, how does it benefit him to have lower income inequality? He's still poor! One could argue that an area with lower income inequality MIGHT have a lower cost of living, which MIGHT help the poor person. On the flip side, an area with few higher earnings probably also has fewer decent jobs, lower tax base, fewer social safety nets, lousy mass transit, and so on, which would hurt the poor person.
Truthfully, income inequality and its effects upon the poor specifically is a wash. The real question is - how many people ARE poor? The red states have a higher poverty rate, so they lose that contest.
Union control of the public schools here in LA and nationwide is the #1 culprit for the dismal state of our pathetic schools; when was the last time you heard of any public HS teacher getting canned for incompetence?
The fact that Democrats are opposed to charter and parochial schools is absurd, and this African-American baby-boomer cherishes the fact that my parents were able to send me to a parochial school for grades 1-8 starting in 1957.
Democrats continue to enable poverty because their top two constituencies (civil service unions and environmentalists) are among the best job-killing entities in existence); look no farther than California's sky-high real estate prices as well as equally brutal gasoline prices which are substantially harder on the poor in this state and in other blue states than on everybody else.
At least far more of the 3,000-4,000+ Toyota employees currently pulling down six figures in Torrance will be able to buy a house in Plano, TX on those same salaries than they can out here where housing prices are roughly twice as high as those in TX, and gasoline is $.70/gallon less than anywhere in California, thanks to the liberals who've been running the state into the ground for over three decades at the behest of Al Gore, Boxer, Pelosi, Governor Brown and other environmental zealots who are also fanatics about green jobs and open space, two more anti-middle class entities which they support wholeheartedly.
Dems aren't friends of the middle class; their economic policies such as demolishing the housing market in the name of 'fairness' devastated the folks whom they allegedly represent, but you'd never know it if you looked real hard and didn't believe everything that Schumer and/or Durbin tells you, and lots of other extreme liberals.
Just look at the Clintons. She lied on tv in her recent interview claiming they were broke and poor when leaving the WH. She didn't mention the $8,000,000 book deal she got during the same time frame. She claims her husband worked hard in "earning" $200,000 per speech. They're now worth a $100,000,000.
They not only lie, the biggest whiners about the poor are the biggest hypocrites. They should be living like Mother Teresa the way they talk about equality and the poor and had yada. They're frauds, just like Obama. He will go on to do the same thing and he will live like a king while whining about the poor.
EPA regulations are not up for debate. This is not China. I don't want to wear masks outside just to grow the economy a bit more. People should learn some real skills (like sustainable technology, computers, or skilled manufacturing) and not depend on pillaging the environment to make a profit.
Oh, but it is up for debate, you are aware this will harm the working class with higher cost of living, and will hurt leftist in coal states..right?
Love the straw man about America looking like China..
Sustainable technology? Good one, which one pays more solar panel instillation or working on a drilling rig in North Dakota?
Computers? How will you power it? With Solar or Wind power? LOL! More over how will you make them when you are not allowed to mine for the sliver, copper, and other vital materials which you Eco-Statist call "pillaging the environment".
I bet if we all came to house you would have grid power, a refrigerator, a car, and more then one flat screen TV..Get off you cloud of self righteousness...You and people like you are anything but.
How about you and people like you live by your standards? Lead the way?
Pay 2 to 5 times more for you electricity.
Pay 2 to 3 dollars more for your gas.
Pay 1.5 to 3 times more for your food.
Pay 2 to 3 times more for your cloths.
Have a lower stranded of living and less wealth...
Enjoy the world of the Hunger Games, you will be living it...
Most of the crime is in the inner city ghetto, like it is in most places.
When I lived in Maryland its the liberal elite who had very little contact with the ghetto poor or illegal aliens (aside from being served by them and their houses cleaned by them) who support these Democrat social programs like a pet cause. Those middle class and working class people who have regular contact with the ghetto people are the ones who know the truth about welfare abuse and the culture of dependency.
As a non-ghetto person who does not depend on the government, I really don't care what goes on in the hood, as long as those people don't come to the decent parts of town and cause trouble. I just don't want my tax dollars going to subsidize their sense of entitlement and dependency just because their ancestors were slaves. You live in a rich area in Connecticut where you are never in contact with poor people except maybe your gardener or housekeeper or maid. You probably never witnessed the rampant welfare fraud and shameless abuse of government benefits. If you did, maybe you would not be so Democrat.
Distance equals Disingenuousne actions..
See how they treat people in the inner city.
See how they treat people who live on the border.
See how they treat people who struggle in the middle class.
See how they treat gun owners.
See how they treat all the people they claim to want to "help" and see that their actions is to enslave them, never help them...
Why do food stamp recipients buy only brand new SUVs? What's wrong with a used sedan? And why are right-wingers following them outside to see what they're driving? You right-wingers are a nosey bunch. Don't move next door to me. I'm armed, and I don't stand for busybodies poking their noses where they don't belong.
Why? Because we pay taxes that is.
Also a leftist telling other we are nosey?
That is a laugh.
Last edited by Oldhag1; 06-09-2014 at 10:37 PM..
Reason: Language
I think it's fairly reasonable to speculate that people are nosy if they are able to tell how another is buying groceries. I can tell if someone is paying by cash, check, or CC (obviously), but I've never been close enough to see if someone is paying with SNAP. And then to follow them to their car? The most realistic scenario is these stories with the new SUV's/BMW's/Mercedes are fictitious.
Texas is a rare exception, due to the oil boom. And good for Texas for being blessed with an abundant resource in high demand creating good jobs. But outside those areas of work, many of the new jobs created were low paying or govt. employees
Lots of states are blessed with resources including CA.
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.
The most realistic scenario is these stories with the new SUV's/BMW's/Mercedes are fictitious.
