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.
I see children having healthcare coverage as something that benefits society at large (which includes me).
I see curbing greenhouse emissions as being something that benefits society at large (which includes me).
I see not cutting taxes in the middle of an economic recovery (what Romney wanted to do) as something that benefits society at large (which includes me).
I see requiring higher income earners (which includes me) in order to balance our budget as something that benefits society at large (which includes me).
Alrighty then. So you are voting in society's interest rather than your own personal interest.
Out of curiosity, you actually believe that if you and other richer people pay more taxes that the politicians will become more responsible with government spending, the deficit and debt? In other words, if you and other affluent people just pay a little more, that the government will not deficit spend?
And people were saying around here not too long ago in several threads that the black vote is meaningless.
In Georgia, if the perfect storm happens in this election for Hillary...i.e. a huge black voter turnout, she would only need one in four white folks to take the state of Georgia. Obama didn't even try to take the state, and only lost it by five points in 2012.
That's because of all the new transplants to the Atlanta area. The numbers are astonishing. I knew a lot of people had moved there, but I didn't realize that it was enough to move the political needle in the state.
Georgia and Texas are both poised to turn blue within the next few election cycles. Arizona may go this election. I think South Carolina could possibly go as well within the next few cycles. Once that happens, it's over for the GOP unless they strongly rebuke Southern Strategy. You can't be a national party if you only appeal to people in Oklahoma, Arkansas, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Alabama.
This year is all about Trumping pissing on the Hispanic vote. That is the only reason Arizona is competitive and has given Clinton a lifeline in Nevada where Harry Reid was the last D to win a big race other than Obama. In Florida it will be Puerto Rican-American turnout (and Cuban-American ambivalence) that swings the vote if Clinton wins there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank DeForrest
This just in; minorities in GA like free stuff or promises thereof.
Dumbest statement ever on the internet. You've obviously have never been to Atlanta, where most of the city is black, educated working class.
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent
True, and an interesting observation. Blacks could have gone on for decades thinking Dems supported their best interests. And then they elected one of their own and had a very eye-opening experience... Dems use Blacks for votes, but don't support their best interest and don't deliver for them.
Name me one time besides salvely were Republicans have had blacks best interest at heart?
I'll wait
Quote:
Originally Posted by residinghere2007
On the bold, I invest primarily in index funds modeled after the S&P 500, not Dow Jones, so I am invested in more than 30 companies.
On the regulations portion, I agree that starting a business can be regulation burdensome, but that is not due to federal government. It is due to state and local government. I live in a Democratic city and county with a governor who is a Republican. My spouse opened a business here and had to go through a lot of bureaucracy with the state, county, and city. However, he was going to open a similar business when we lived in Georgia and they had MUCH more regulation there than we have here in Ohio.
So IMO Obama and the federal regulators really don't have all that much of an effect on business creation. The state especially has the most regulations and in Democratic areas I do think that they usually have many more layers of regulation crap. My spouse is from Chicago and felt it as similar to Atlanta in regards to his desire to open a business. I know a lot of people who moved to this area from Michigan as well due to that state placing more regulations, fees, and all sorts of licensing requirements on various businesses versus Ohio. In Atlanta, the city itself and county had the most burdensome license requirements.
So IMO people who talk about regulations and "business creation" in regards to Obama and the federal government overlook the fact that state and local governments are usually the primary areas where these regulations will come into play. Obama has actually done a lot to increase funding to the SBA and state and local governments to assist people to open businesses with loan opportunities. I know because at a previous position of which I worked, part of my job was referring entrepreneurs to these organizations to assist them in establishing small businesses.
And on black people being opposed to HRC and Democrats, IMO that is nothing new. As stated, I'm black. Black people b**tch all the time about Democrats lol. I think many of you just don't pay attention to that fact. However, even when we b**tch we rarely see any viable options on the right side of the political sphere and due to us feeling it is a duty of ours to vote, we will vote for the Democrat even with we don't like them all that much. I honestly don't particularly like HRC but I'm voting for her based on the factor above - the markets will remain stable, and honestly she is just smarter and more knowledgeable about actual government, policy, and how the government works versus Donald Trump. I also see him as more corrupt than she is because I worked in housing and know a lot about his past in regards to housing discrimination. His cases were used as case studies in trainings I had to participate in. I also don't buy into the idea that he is all that much of a successful businessman. IMO he is a poor little rich kid who inherited millions of dollars and who just continuously invested it to make his billions along with selling his image and licensing his name. He IMO does not know how to run a typical business and would not have been successful at anything if it weren't for his rich father, who actually was a self made man.
This^^^^
But the people that still defend this guy scares me
And people were saying around here not too long ago in several threads that the black vote is meaningless.
In Georgia, if the perfect storm happens in this election for Hillary...i.e. a huge black voter turnout, she would only need one in four white folks to take the state of Georgia. Obama didn't even try to take the state, and only lost it by five points in 2012.
That's because of all the new transplants to the Atlanta area. The numbers are astonishing. I knew a lot of people had moved there, but I didn't realize that it was enough to move the political needle in the state.
Alrighty then. So you are voting in society's interest rather than your own personal interest.
Society's interest and my own personal interests (as well as yours) are quite often aligned. You act as if climate change would in no way affect you. Or that cutting taxes during a period of anemic economic growth somehow wouldn't affect you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by War Beagle
Out of curiosity, you actually believe that if you and other richer people pay more taxes that the politicians will become more responsible with government spending, the deficit and debt? In other words, if you and other affluent people just pay a little more, that the government will not deficit spend?
Pretty much everything. You should read what you post. Very condescending, and implies minorities can't think for themselves.
Actually, the only one implying that minorities can't think for themselves here is you. The poster you are responding to is black, and you are telling her/him that they don't understand black voter mentality? Funny stuff.
Society's interest and my own personal interests (as well as yours) are quite often aligned. You act as if climate change would in no way affect you. Or that cutting taxes during a period of anemic economic growth somehow wouldn't affect you.
Did Bill Clinton not leave office with a surplus?
I'm not willing to spend any money on something that may or may not cause problems. While the climate is always changing, I think politicians are mostly interesting in climate change because they can use it to further control our lives.
Bill Clinton's surplus could very well have been a fluke. I think it is more likely that whatever the taxes are raised by, deficit spending would increase by a roughly equivalent amount. No way to tell which of us is correct right now, but I have no faith in politicians to do the right thing.
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.
