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 am a red state rural American living in a conservative southern state. According to a few posters in here I should be uneducated, using meth and living in a delapitated trailer. This narrative of us is how you left wing loons justify your snobbery and elitism you direct at us. We are not uneducated, most us believe in God, most of believe in our constitution and its guarantee of freedom. Many of us also despise the liberal worldview, despise the politically correct, despise the socialism of the left. Red state America has reached its tolerance level with the leftist insanity, that is why we have Trump. Is Trump my ideal conservative leader? No, far from it. However he represents a rebellion against years of sliding towards a leftist PC socialist dung heap. I'll take any stand we real Americans can muster. Red state America is happy to welcome Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania to the good guys side.. Years of living with the consequences of liberalism has turned them quite "red". They have been saved from the dark side.
The liberal elites should know that millions in red state America will never accept thier values, never accept thier rule over us and never accept thier violating of our rights. In fact it's fair to say that many of us hate everything you believe in. Right now we have the upper hand, and even if you win control of the government you will never force us to follow your rules. You can only violate our rights so much before we stand against you. Every liberal should know what the cost will be if you force your will on this nation. Anyone who knows thier history knows what this deep divide in our nation could lead too. We are every bit as divided today as we were in 1860.
I am a red state rural American living in a conservative southern state. According to a few posters in here I should be uneducated, using meth and living in a delapitated trailer. This narrative of us is how you left wing loons justify your snobbery and elitism you direct at us. We are not uneducated, most us believe in God, most of believe in our constitution and its guarantee of freedom. Many of us also despise the liberal worldview, despise the politically correct, despise the socialism of the left. Red state America has reached its tolerance level with the leftist insanity, that is why we have Trump. Is Trump my ideal conservative leader? No, far from it. However he represents a rebellion against years of sliding towards a leftist PC socialist dung heap. I'll take any stand we real Americans can muster. Red state America is happy to welcome Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania to the good guys side.. Years of living with the consequences of liberalism has turned them quite "red". They have been saved from the dark side.
The liberal elites should know that millions in red state America will never accept thier values, never accept thier rule over us and never accept thier violating of our rights. In fact it's fair to say that many of us hate everything you believe in. Right now we have the upper hand, and even if you win control of the government you will never force us to follow your rules. You can only violate our rights so much before we stand against you. Every liberal should know what the cost will be if you force your will on this nation. Anyone who knows thier history knows what this deep divide in our nation could lead too. We are every bit as divided today as we were in 1860.
Real economic progress in America today is driven by the big "liberal" cities, and that technological change coming from those liberals is only accelerating and will transform pretty much the entire world you know... Sorry, but that's where the upper hand really comes from in the long run, and that's why things look the way they do. Trust me, capitalism is alive and well, and it's being driven by elite liberals. But because wealth inequality is growing, it is also unavoidable that more "socialist" redistribution will continue...from the productive liberal cities to the Red states, as has been well documented. Your state is probably a net beneficiary of tax dollars from liberals like me. I hit the 33% marginal Fed bracket last year - how about you?
Real economic progress in America today is driven by the big "liberal" cities, and that technological change coming from those liberals is only accelerating and will transform pretty much the entire world you know... Sorry, but that's where the upper hand really comes from in the long run, and that's why things look the way they do. Trust me, capitalism is alive and well, and it's being driven by elite liberals. But because wealth inequality is growing, it is also unavoidable that more "socialist" redistribution will continue...from the productive liberal cities to the Red states, as has been well documented. Your state is probably a net beneficiary of tax dollars from liberals like me. I hit the 33% marginal Fed bracket last year - how about you?
We have all heard liberals claim that blue states support the red ones. I also find it strange that a person would brag about thier income by stating what tax bracket they hit. I guess that is very revealing about how you view government, you must enjoy giving away tens of thousands of dollars to wasteful bureaucrats. Don't you want to keep the money you earn?
The high income in liberal cities does not mean what you think it does with respect to how things will play out. Just because people in San Francisco and Boston make big paychecks does not mean they will control the nation, heck those people spend most of that "big paycheck" on taxes and high cost of living. In many cases a guy working in a small factory in Arkansas will live better than some professional people in SF or NYC because of cost of living. Also the cities having more wealth on paper means nothing if our differences come to violence in this nation. Rural red state America is better armed, tougher and more prepared for a conflict. Also it is often true that the winners of a civil war or revolution are the ones who control the countryside. Another fact is that our military is made up of men and women largely from red states and those bases are in red states. Liberal urban money cannot undo these conservative advantages if our differences ever come to violence. The liberal dream of disarming us and taking away our free speech ( enforcement of political correctness by law) will trigger violence, which IMO the left would lose quickly. The best course of action for all Americans is to respect the constitution and avoid a conflict like that.
We have all heard liberals claim that blue states support the red ones. I also find it strange that a person would brag about thier income by stating what tax bracket they hit. I guess that is very revealing about how you view government, you must enjoy giving away tens of thousands of dollars to wasteful bureaucrats. Don't you want to keep the money you earn?
The high income in liberal cities does not mean what you think it does with respect to how things will play out. Just because people in San Francisco and Boston make big paychecks does not mean they will control the nation, heck those people spend most of that "big paycheck" on taxes and high cost of living. In many cases a guy working in a small factory in Arkansas will live better than some professional people in SF or NYC because of cost of living. Also the cities having more wealth on paper means nothing if our differences come to violence in this nation. Rural red state America is better armed, tougher and more prepared for a conflict. Also it is often true that the winners of a civil war or revolution are the ones who control the countryside. Another fact is that our military is made up of men and women largely from red states and those bases are in red states. Liberal urban money cannot undo these conservative advantages if our differences ever come to violence. The liberal dream of disarming us and taking away our free speech ( enforcement of political correctness by law) will trigger violence, which IMO the left would lose quickly. The best course of action for all Americans is to respect the constitution and avoid a conflict like that.
Funny thing is, having lived in a rural area, the vast majority of people relied on public assistance to get by. The more productive people commuted to the nearest metro to work. I'm sure there are rural places where you have survivalists living off the grid, but that's more of an exception than a rule. The vast majority of rural residents rely on the money of bigger cities to survive.
I'm not putting down rural life at all, it can be very pleasant. It's just that in a 21st century economy it's tough to make a living in such places.
If the WaPo-Kaiser Family Foundation conducted the opposite poll of nearly 1700 Americans (including more than 1000 adults living in urban areas and large cities) would they find............."a deep-seated kinship in urban America, coupled with a stark sense of estrangement from people who live in rural areas?" Would "nearly 7 in 10 urban residents say their values differ from those who live in rural areas and small towns, including 4 in 10 who say their values are "very different"?
I'm willing to bet they would.
I've been saying for years that the cultural divide in this country, and every other country, is between the cities and the countryside. In Britain it is the same, just as it is in France, and Japan, and even China.
The countryside is for small government, the cities are not. Mainly because the cities couldn't exist without big government. They are dependent on their survival from a constant import of food, commodities, and goods produced elsewhere. Many/most of the people who live in the cities would literally starve to death without either a government handout, or a government paycheck. While the countryside is more-or-less sufficient unto itself(or easily could be).
"Those who labor in the earth are the chosen people of God, if ever he had a chosen people, whose breasts he has made his peculiar deposit for substantial and genuine virtue. It is the focus in which he keeps alive that sacred fire, which otherwise might escape from the face of the earth. Corruption of morals in the mass of cultivators is a phenomenon of which no age nor nation has furnished an example. It is the mark set on those, who not looking up to heaven, to their own soil and industry, as does the husbandman, for their subsistence, depend for it on the casualties and caprice of customers. Dependence begets subservience and venality, suffocates the germ of virtue, and prepares fit tools for the designs of ambition.
This, the natural progress and consequence of the arts, has sometimes perhaps been retarded by accidental circumstances: but, generally speaking, the proportion which the aggregate of the other classes of citizens bears in any state to that of its husbandmen, is the proportion of its unsound to its healthy parts, and is a good-enough barometer whereby to measure its degree of corruption." - Thomas Jefferson
I've been saying for years that the cultural divide in this country, and every other country, is between the cities and the countryside. In Britain it is the same, just as it is in France, and Japan, and even China.
The countryside is for small government, the cities are not. Mainly because the cities couldn't exist without big government. They are dependent on their survival from a constant import of food, commodities, and goods produced elsewhere. Many/most of the people who live in the cities would literally starve to death without either a government handout, or a government paycheck. While the countryside is more-or-less sufficient unto itself(or easily could be).
I'm starting to think rural voters really think urban areas need them. If those same urban areas took their money and shopped for food globally (it's already happening, check the tags on the produce at Costco) those rural areas would have no one buying, they've be left to bartering with neighbors. First, let's end all the farm subsidies. And since rural voters hate all that globalism, what are they going to do with all the milk Mexico doesn't buy?
America’s $1.2 Billion Mexico Milk Trade Is Now at Risk
The biggest U.S. dairy importer is talking with New Zealand and buying more from the EU. Guess why.
I'm starting to think rural voters really think urban areas need them. If those same urban areas took their money and shopped for food globally (it's already happening, check the tags on the produce at Costco) those rural areas would have no one buying, they've be left to bartering with neighbors. First, let's end all the farm subsidies. And since rural voters hate all that globalism, what are they going to do with all the milk Mexico doesn't buy?
Your problem is that you interpret the world in terms of dollars; Without understanding how dollars are manipulated to purchase/control resources.
When I say that the cities would starve without the countryside, it is a fundamentally true statement. New York City cannot feed itself. It can only trade for food produced elsewhere.
The only thing a person needs to live, is food. Thus the countryside can easily become self-sufficient, while the cities cannot. If the apocalypse comes, people aren't going to be running from the countryside into the cities, they'll be running from the cities into the countryside.
Likewise, if our government was to collapse tomorrow, the cities would empty out. People would stream to the countryside, just as they have done throughout history, when empires/trade-networks collapse.
It is certainly true that big cities have lots of dollars, and with dollars, they are able to buy goods produced elsewhere. But where exactly does a city like New York City get its dollars?
New York City is the home of Wall-street, its economy is heavily dependent on the machinations of finance, the banks. But how does our banking system work? Or more specifically, how does the Federal Reserve system work? How does money come into existence? And how might this system allow the manipulation of dollars in favor of certain groups, at the expense of others? Or more directly, how does this system manipulate the entire economy of the United States?
And if you want a better example, think of Washington D.C.. Where does it get its money? What would happen to Washington D.C. if this country was to split up?
Did you know that six of the ten richest counties in America in the Washington D.C. area?
Stop looking at dollars, nothing is easier to do than print more dollars(and give them to your friends, as to give them an economic "competitive-advantage"). It isn't so easy to print food.
Most of the people in the countryside just want to be left alone. But how could the cities leave them alone, if they would starve without them?
Last edited by Redshadowz; 06-19-2017 at 03:19 AM..
Your problem is that you interpret the world in terms of dollars; Without understanding how dollars are manipulated to purchase/control resources.
When I say that the cities would starve without the countryside, it is a fundamentally true statement. New York City cannot feed itself. It can only trade for food produced elsewhere.
The only thing a person needs to live, is food. Thus the countryside can easily become self-sufficient, while the cities cannot. If the apocalypse comes, people aren't going to be running from the countryside into the cities, they'll be running from the cities into the countryside.
Likewise, if our government was to collapse tomorrow, the cities would empty out. People would stream to the countryside, just as they have done throughout history, when empires/trade-networks collapse.
If rural areas are truly self sufficient, they should be able to compete globally without farm subsidies. While they are waiting for the world to collapse, let's let blue states keep their money and red states keep theirs, each state required to be self-sufficient. Blue states can shop for their resources globally and red states can keep growing food without farm subsidies and sell globally. Blue states may buy from them or they may buy elsewhere but if rural areas grow a good product, they should do fine. They should just do it without tax handouts in the form of direct payments from the government paid by tax payers.
Rural Americans gave us Trump. They're the poorest, least educated, most drug addicted, least employed, cohort in America.
Way to go with that generalization ! Keep up the good work in pushing that divide even further.
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.
