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 all are prosperous. What annoys me is the often repeated line that Texas is prospering due to low taxes. Do these people really not understand that Texas is prospering due to oil and gas?
Look down the road and ask what Texas will look like in 10 years if government continues to undermine public education, fails to upgrade the infrastructure and ignores the growing water shortage. It's got nothing to do with conservative or liberal. It's about short term prosperity versus long term prosperity.
Exactly. People seem to think that when I say Texas needs an active government to develop the state like every other healthy developed state does, the knee jerk reaction I get is that I mean "socialism" or something. If Texas wants to take command of the huge influx and growth it might have to grow out of this belief that the state is is just some administrative arm to foster business.
What made Texas boom was its ample cheap land ride for development, oil prices, and diverse economy. Things that a lot of other states don't have. But it lags in infrastructure, education, health care and does have some poverty issues.
There is a ton of uneven economic geographical development. Texas has the tools to truly be one of the best states in the country, if not the best but it so afraid that any sensible moderate policy will somehow turn it so leftward that it will become like California. California has become the boogeyman canard Texans use to deter any (needed) growth in government.
Exactly. People seem to think that when I say Texas needs an active government to develop the state like every other healthy developed state does, the knee jerk reaction I get is that I mean "socialism" or something. If Texas wants to take command of the huge influx and growth it might have to grow out of this belief that the state is is just some administrative arm to foster business.
What made Texas boom was its ample cheap land ride for development, oil prices, and diverse economy. Things that a lot of other states don't have. But it lags in infrastructure, education, health care and does have some poverty issues.
There is a ton of uneven economic geographical development. Texas has the tools to truly be one of the best states in the country, if not the best but it so afraid that any sensible moderate policy will somehow turn it so leftward that it will become like California. California has become the boogeyman canard Texans use to deter any (needed) growth in government.
Government can't fix everything. Government can't motivate people. Government can't make bad parents into good parents. Government can't make everything fair.
First, government can't fund anything without revenue. Revenue comes from business not printing presses. If this wasn't true then every third world country could go on fiat currency and print their way to prosperity.
Second, money doesn't fix everything, especially education. We can compare how much Texas spends per child to both Finland and Washington DC and compare results. Texas spends about the same per student as Finland, but Finland is always ranked towards the top, in the world, in education. Washington DC spends almost three times as much and is ranked towards the very bottom in the US and the world. (I've posted links on CD to this data many, many, many times). If a child comes from a home without any regard for education and isn't driven himself/herself, it doesn't matter how much money you throw, waste, on that child, they will most likely fail. The single most important factor for a child to receive a good education are the parents. Unless all children are sent to government camps to be raised and educated, there will never be "equality" in education, because what happens at home is the biggest factor.
Third, I keep hearing that Texas is "lucky" we have oil. (No, not in your post, but it's a common criticism of Texas). Sure we have oil, but most of our oil business which is booming supports the extraction and processing of oil all over the world. Texas isn't like places such as Venezuela or Saudi Arabia were we just generate revenue from it being pumped out. Texas businesses are GLOBAL. Our businesses are the ones traveling to Saudi Arabia and Venezuela. Airports like IAH are busy with O&G professionals flying all over the globe conducting business. That's not luck, that's seeing a need throughout the world and filling it.
Fourth, Texas, specifically our cities and Houston in particular, have tremendous healthcare. Our only challenge are the rural areas that won't be that much different than the rural areas of California, New Mexico or Iowa. Issues with rural medical care is pretty much universal. Now, if we are talk economic access to family physicians and such, Texas, like California, New Mexico and Arizona will take hits due to the number of illegals residing in our state.
Finally, whenever government spends money on any kind of social problem, they have to get that money elsewhere. That elsewhere is primarily from the middle class. There just aren't enough rich people to pay for everything. That's just a fact. You can only tax the rich so much, and it's not to cover any significant amount of spending. The idea that you can tax businesses is just a fairytale. Almost all business taxes are passed down to the end consumer, primarily the middle class. It's just a hidden tax that give the illusion that some rich company is paying for things, when that is not reality. Whenever the people who understand this see the waste, fraud and bureaucracy that accompanies government programs, it immediately triggers "they are wasting MY money." And why should it not trigger this? Most people are more than willing to pay to help those in need, but it has gotten to the point where too much is taken and it's accompanied with "don't be so greedy, be glad we don't take more, which we should."
There is a balance that needs to be struck, and I believe Texas is the state that is trying hardest and being most successful in striking that balance. Sure, it means there will not be equal outcome, but there will NEVER be equal outcome. It should never be the governments job to continue taking more from me to throw away because tens of thousands of "parents" don't act like responsible parents. Is it the child's fault? No, but life isn't fair, and burning up tax money from people who could utilize it better is not the answer.
Mr. Martinez your post may be the most intelligent post I've ever read here. I haven't jumped into the fray but you said exactly what I know and see going on in Texas. Thank you!
Government can't fix everything. Government can't motivate people. Government can't make bad parents into good parents. Government can't make everything fair.
First, government can't fund anything without revenue. Revenue comes from business not printing presses. If this wasn't true then every third world country could go on fiat currency and print their way to prosperity.
Second, money doesn't fix everything, especially education. We can compare how much Texas spends per child to both Finland and Washington DC and compare results. Texas spends about the same per student as Finland, but Finland is always ranked towards the top, in the world, in education. Washington DC spends almost three times as much and is ranked towards the very bottom in the US and the world. (I've posted links on CD to this data many, many, many times). If a child comes from a home without any regard for education and isn't driven himself/herself, it doesn't matter how much money you throw, waste, on that child, they will most likely fail. The single most important factor for a child to receive a good education are the parents. Unless all children are sent to government camps to be raised and educated, there will never be "equality" in education, because what happens at home is the biggest factor.
Third, I keep hearing that Texas is "lucky" we have oil. (No, not in your post, but it's a common criticism of Texas). Sure we have oil, but most of our oil business which is booming supports the extraction and processing of oil all over the world. Texas isn't like places such as Venezuela or Saudi Arabia were we just generate revenue from it being pumped out. Texas businesses are GLOBAL. Our businesses are the ones traveling to Saudi Arabia and Venezuela. Airports like IAH are busy with O&G professionals flying all over the globe conducting business. That's not luck, that's seeing a need throughout the world and filling it.
Fourth, Texas, specifically our cities and Houston in particular, have tremendous healthcare. Our only challenge are the rural areas that won't be that much different than the rural areas of California, New Mexico or Iowa. Issues with rural medical care is pretty much universal. Now, if we are talk economic access to family physicians and such, Texas, like California, New Mexico and Arizona will take hits due to the number of illegals residing in our state.
Finally, whenever government spends money on any kind of social problem, they have to get that money elsewhere. That elsewhere is primarily from the middle class. There just aren't enough rich people to pay for everything. That's just a fact. You can only tax the rich so much, and it's not to cover any significant amount of spending. The idea that you can tax businesses is just a fairytale. Almost all business taxes are passed down to the end consumer, primarily the middle class. It's just a hidden tax that give the illusion that some rich company is paying for things, when that is not reality. Whenever the people who understand this see the waste, fraud and bureaucracy that accompanies government programs, it immediately triggers "they are wasting MY money." And why should it not trigger this? Most people are more than willing to pay to help those in need, but it has gotten to the point where too much is taken and it's accompanied with "don't be so greedy, be glad we don't take more, which we should."
There is a balance that needs to be struck, and I believe Texas is the state that is trying hardest and being most successful in striking that balance. Sure, it means there will not be equal outcome, but there will NEVER be equal outcome. It should never be the governments job to continue taking more from me to throw away because tens of thousands of "parents" don't act like responsible parents. Is it the child's fault? No, but life isn't fair, and burning up tax money from people who could utilize it better is not the answer.
Pedro, why do a lot of right ward talking points always descend into talk of "culture" when asked about social ills? Or when someone brings up a solution it's automatically discarded as trying to bring about an equal outcome?
First, let's just take your word that Finland and Texas spend the same on each child for education. Ok, but Finland still has a pretty respectable social welfare that takes the burden off parents and children so they can easily go to school. The number one problem teachers across this country say is the reason why kids struggle is not lack of spending (although that is also a problem) but poverty. A lot suffer from malnutrition (obesity included), single parents working two jobs, no supervision, live in high crime areas, etc. So the solution is not just throwing money at schools but something more holistic.
But this is what I'm talking about and this is why I don't think people of your stripe have the solutions, because you guys don't think systemically. Everything is fractured into individual atomized problems with no connection/relation to each other. So the problem is always a cultural defect or a matter of personal responsibility. The system itself could never be at fault because then that would give room to say that the people suffering the brunt of poverty in an unequal society are *gasp* victims.
The issue is also about how a state spends (and manages) its resources. Finland or Norway aren't even as rich as Texas, I don't think and manage to do more with less. Before you go and repeat the typical canard that those nations have low homogenous populations, try the Netherlands with a population of 16 million and roughly 20% being non Dutch and is still usually ranked in the highest quadrant in education and overall well being rankings.
Even here at home, Texas is only second to California in wealthiest state by gdp. As a stand alone country Texas would rank 14th. No Pedro, there's no excuse. I'm sure there are people in Texas in power who look at the figures and will find sensible practical moderate solutions and aren't scared to think to themselves, "hmmm I'm wondering if this policy is too socialist or will bring about too much equal outcome". They aren't sitting there thinking that "perhaps its a matter of culture, parents do seen lazier these days".
Pedro, why do a lot of right ward talking points always descend into talk of "culture" when asked about social ills? Or when someone brings up a solution it's automatically discarded as trying to bring about an equal outcome?
First, let's just take your word that Finland and Texas spend the same on each child for education. Ok, but Finland still has a pretty respectable social welfare that takes the burden off parents and children so they can easily go to school. The number one problem teachers across this country say is the reason why kids struggle is not lack of spending (although that is also a problem) but poverty. A lot suffer from malnutrition (obesity included), single parents working two jobs, no supervision, live in high crime areas, etc. So the solution is not just throwing money at schools but something more holistic.
Well, I'm glad you agree that things outside of school have such a significant impact on education.
I'm also glad you agree that throwing money at education doesn't automatically fix it.
This is nice, we're getting somewhere.
Quote:
Originally Posted by radiolibre99
But this is what I'm talking about and this is why I don't think people of your stripe have the solutions, because you guys don't think systemically. Everything is fractured into individual atomized problems with no connection/relation to each other. So the problem is always a cultural defect or a matter of personal responsibility. The system itself could never be at fault because then that would give room to say that the people suffering the brunt of poverty in an unequal society are *gasp* victims.
And how has that war on poverty been doing?
With our "system", people who have some sort of substantial physical or mental defect, people who have bad luck and people who refuse to help themselves are at high risk to end up in poverty.
I'm all for full-time assistance to those with a mental or physical handicap.
I'm all for temporary assistance to those who have bad luck.
I'm also for having programs, with severe restrictions and thick strings attached, for those who have put themselves in poverty.
The one thing I refuse to do is allow assistance and programs to be abused and to act like we have a responsibility to those who want to leach off of others.
Quote:
Originally Posted by radiolibre99
The issue is also about how a state spends (and manages) its resources. Finland or Norway aren't even as rich as Texas, I don't think and manage to do more with less. Before you go and repeat the typical canard that those nations have low homogenous populations, try the Netherlands with a population of 16 million and roughly 20% being non Dutch and is still usually ranked in the highest quadrant in education and overall well being rankings.
They offer more programs because they take more money to pay for them.
The good thing for Finland is that they apparently understand that more money doesn't automatically translate into a better education system.
Quote:
Originally Posted by radiolibre99
Even here at home, Texas is only second to California in wealthiest state by gdp. As a stand alone country Texas would rank 14th. No Pedro, there's no excuse. I'm sure there are people in Texas in power who look at the figures and will find sensible practical moderate solutions and aren't scared to think to themselves, "hmmm I'm wondering if this policy is too socialist or will bring about too much equal outcome". They aren't sitting there thinking that "perhaps its a matter of culture, parents do seen lazier these days".
The problem is that your under some delusion that everybody tries just as hard as everybody else, and it's only obstacles beyond their control that block their success.
Let me ask you this. Did everybody in your high school make the same grades? If not, did everybody in you high school try just as hard?
Maybe I went to a weird school. At my school you had kids that could seriously care less about what grades they made. They tended to not do nearly as well as those kids who took school serious and studied at night instead of goofing off.
Later, when I was in college, I knew people who skipped class because they partied too hard the night before or spent their days socializing and/or sleeping. I'm guess this didn't happen where you went to college.
When I went home over breaks, I'd see friends who didn't go to college. Some were out busting their humps and moving up while others were partying and blowing every dime on stereos, cars and good times. I guess you didn't experience this.
What I found to be somewhat the rule was the kids who studied hard in high school and applied themselves in college did well financially. I also found that the ones who didn't go to college but worked hard and/or gained skills did well financially. The ones I knew who partied down and had no discipline whatsoever were the ones who lived paycheck to paycheck without health insurance and without every moving forward.
I guess we could subsidize those who partied, and continue to do so, so that they have the same economic status as me. We could say, "Well, since their parents put them in a disadvantage by not teaching them how to get ahead, we need to make it fair. Pedro should pay more in taxes in order for them to catch up."
With very few exceptions, this country gives equal access to get ahead. There is no way to guarantee equal results. If people CHOOSE to throw away opportunity, the rest of us shouldn't be taxed to pull them up.
Should the kids didn't study or try in high school be given the exact same college opportunities as those kids who studied and worked hard?
Should the guy who worked his way through a trade school not earn more than they one who filled out an application at McDonalds?
Last I saw, a significant portion of this country was liberal, and I assume they share such ideas as you. Why isn't it that tens of millions of you don't get together and put 15% of your income into a fund used for the poor? Why is it that liberals have this, "I'm not going to help them unless everybody is forced to help them" attitude?
It's funny that liberals seem to always want to offer to have the rich pay more but they never seem to volunteer to pay more themselves. I can only assume it's selfishness for most.
Well, I'm glad you agree that things outside of school have such a significant impact on education.
I'm also glad you agree that throwing money at education doesn't automatically fix it.
This is nice, we're getting somewhere.
And how has that war on poverty been doing?
With our "system", people who have some sort of substantial physical or mental defect, people who have bad luck and people who refuse to help themselves are at high risk to end up in poverty.
I'm all for full-time assistance to those with a mental or physical handicap.
I'm all for temporary assistance to those who have bad luck.
I'm also for having programs, with severe restrictions and thick strings attached, for those who have put themselves in poverty.
The one thing I refuse to do is allow assistance and programs to be abused and to act like we have a responsibility to those who want to leach off of others.
They offer more programs because they take more money to pay for them.
The good thing for Finland is that they apparently understand that more money doesn't automatically translate into a better education system.
The problem is that your under some delusion that everybody tries just as hard as everybody else, and it's only obstacles beyond their control that block their success.
Let me ask you this. Did everybody in your high school make the same grades? If not, did everybody in you high school try just as hard?
Maybe I went to a weird school. At my school you had kids that could seriously care less about what grades they made. They tended to not do nearly as well as those kids who took school serious and studied at night instead of goofing off.
Later, when I was in college, I knew people who skipped class because they partied too hard the night before or spent their days socializing and/or sleeping. I'm guess this didn't happen where you went to college.
When I went home over breaks, I'd see friends who didn't go to college. Some were out busting their humps and moving up while others were partying and blowing every dime on stereos, cars and good times. I guess you didn't experience this.
What I found to be somewhat the rule was the kids who studied hard in high school and applied themselves in college did well financially. I also found that the ones who didn't go to college but worked hard and/or gained skills did well financially. The ones I knew who partied down and had no discipline whatsoever were the ones who lived paycheck to paycheck without health insurance and without every moving forward.
I guess we could subsidize those who partied, and continue to do so, so that they have the same economic status as me. We could say, "Well, since their parents put them in a disadvantage by not teaching them how to get ahead, we need to make it fair. Pedro should pay more in taxes in order for them to catch up."
With very few exceptions, this country gives equal access to get ahead. There is no way to guarantee equal results. If people CHOOSE to throw away opportunity, the rest of us shouldn't be taxed to pull them up.
Should the kids didn't study or try in high school be given the exact same college opportunities as those kids who studied and worked hard?
Should the guy who worked his way through a trade school not earn more than they one who filled out an application at McDonalds?
Last I saw, a significant portion of this country was liberal, and I assume they share such ideas as you. Why isn't it that tens of millions of you don't get together and put 15% of your income into a fund used for the poor? Why is it that liberals have this, "I'm not going to help them unless everybody is forced to help them" attitude?
It's funny that liberals seem to always want to offer to have the rich pay more but they never seem to volunteer to pay more themselves. I can only assume it's selfishness for most.
Good job Pedro. You have constructed a straw man and beat him to death very effectively.
Let's start with your assertion about equality. Who said everyone should earn the same income? That's never been my point. Makes a great straw man though. I said everyone should get the opportunity to get an education regardless of whether they are born to a wealthy or poor family.
Let's try education. We are falling behind the world academically and that's a largely undisputed fact. I agree with you that money spent alone does not solve education's problems. Some of our problem is an obsession with trying to measure education and the teaching to the test that results.
In terms of spending, not only does Texas lag most other states on spending per student but there is vast inequality between schools. The poor schools in Waco are vastly under-resourced, especially compared to the wealthy schools. How is it wise or ethical to take socially disadvantaged groups and spend much less on education for their children? think about the long run social costs.
Every child deserves a chance at a decent education. If they don't do anything with that, then I agree with you that they need to live with the consequences. However if we don't give every kid a chance to get a decent education then it's hard to blame them for failing.
Government can't fix everything. Government can't motivate people. Government can't make bad parents into good parents. Government can't make everything fair.
First, government can't fund anything without revenue. Revenue comes from business not printing presses. If this wasn't true then every third world country could go on fiat currency and print their way to prosperity.
Second, money doesn't fix everything, especially education. We can compare how much Texas spends per child to both Finland and Washington DC and compare results. Texas spends about the same per student as Finland, but Finland is always ranked towards the top, in the world, in education. Washington DC spends almost three times as much and is ranked towards the very bottom in the US and the world. (I've posted links on CD to this data many, many, many times). If a child comes from a home without any regard for education and isn't driven himself/herself, it doesn't matter how much money you throw, waste, on that child, they will most likely fail. The single most important factor for a child to receive a good education are the parents. Unless all children are sent to government camps to be raised and educated, there will never be "equality" in education, because what happens at home is the biggest factor.
Third, I keep hearing that Texas is "lucky" we have oil. (No, not in your post, but it's a common criticism of Texas). Sure we have oil, but most of our oil business which is booming supports the extraction and processing of oil all over the world. Texas isn't like places such as Venezuela or Saudi Arabia were we just generate revenue from it being pumped out. Texas businesses are GLOBAL. Our businesses are the ones traveling to Saudi Arabia and Venezuela. Airports like IAH are busy with O&G professionals flying all over the globe conducting business. That's not luck, that's seeing a need throughout the world and filling it.
Fourth, Texas, specifically our cities and Houston in particular, have tremendous healthcare. Our only challenge are the rural areas that won't be that much different than the rural areas of California, New Mexico or Iowa. Issues with rural medical care is pretty much universal. Now, if we are talk economic access to family physicians and such, Texas, like California, New Mexico and Arizona will take hits due to the number of illegals residing in our state.
Finally, whenever government spends money on any kind of social problem, they have to get that money elsewhere. That elsewhere is primarily from the middle class. There just aren't enough rich people to pay for everything. That's just a fact. You can only tax the rich so much, and it's not to cover any significant amount of spending. The idea that you can tax businesses is just a fairytale. Almost all business taxes are passed down to the end consumer, primarily the middle class. It's just a hidden tax that give the illusion that some rich company is paying for things, when that is not reality. Whenever the people who understand this see the waste, fraud and bureaucracy that accompanies government programs, it immediately triggers "they are wasting MY money." And why should it not trigger this? Most people are more than willing to pay to help those in need, but it has gotten to the point where too much is taken and it's accompanied with "don't be so greedy, be glad we don't take more, which we should."
There is a balance that needs to be struck, and I believe Texas is the state that is trying hardest and being most successful in striking that balance. Sure, it means there will not be equal outcome, but there will NEVER be equal outcome. It should never be the governments job to continue taking more from me to throw away because tens of thousands of "parents" don't act like responsible parents. Is it the child's fault? No, but life isn't fair, and burning up tax money from people who could utilize it better is not the answer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PedroMartinez
Well, I'm glad you agree that things outside of school have such a significant impact on education.
I'm also glad you agree that throwing money at education doesn't automatically fix it.
This is nice, we're getting somewhere.
And how has that war on poverty been doing?
With our "system", people who have some sort of substantial physical or mental defect, people who have bad luck and people who refuse to help themselves are at high risk to end up in poverty.
I'm all for full-time assistance to those with a mental or physical handicap.
I'm all for temporary assistance to those who have bad luck.
I'm also for having programs, with severe restrictions and thick strings attached, for those who have put themselves in poverty.
The one thing I refuse to do is allow assistance and programs to be abused and to act like we have a responsibility to those who want to leach off of others.
They offer more programs because they take more money to pay for them.
The good thing for Finland is that they apparently understand that more money doesn't automatically translate into a better education system.
The problem is that your under some delusion that everybody tries just as hard as everybody else, and it's only obstacles beyond their control that block their success.
Let me ask you this. Did everybody in your high school make the same grades? If not, did everybody in you high school try just as hard?
Maybe I went to a weird school. At my school you had kids that could seriously care less about what grades they made. They tended to not do nearly as well as those kids who took school serious and studied at night instead of goofing off.
Later, when I was in college, I knew people who skipped class because they partied too hard the night before or spent their days socializing and/or sleeping. I'm guess this didn't happen where you went to college.
When I went home over breaks, I'd see friends who didn't go to college. Some were out busting their humps and moving up while others were partying and blowing every dime on stereos, cars and good times. I guess you didn't experience this.
What I found to be somewhat the rule was the kids who studied hard in high school and applied themselves in college did well financially. I also found that the ones who didn't go to college but worked hard and/or gained skills did well financially. The ones I knew who partied down and had no discipline whatsoever were the ones who lived paycheck to paycheck without health insurance and without every moving forward.
I guess we could subsidize those who partied, and continue to do so, so that they have the same economic status as me. We could say, "Well, since their parents put them in a disadvantage by not teaching them how to get ahead, we need to make it fair. Pedro should pay more in taxes in order for them to catch up."
With very few exceptions, this country gives equal access to get ahead. There is no way to guarantee equal results. If people CHOOSE to throw away opportunity, the rest of us shouldn't be taxed to pull them up.
Should the kids didn't study or try in high school be given the exact same college opportunities as those kids who studied and worked hard?
Should the guy who worked his way through a trade school not earn more than they one who filled out an application at McDonalds?
Last I saw, a significant portion of this country was liberal, and I assume they share such ideas as you. Why isn't it that tens of millions of you don't get together and put 15% of your income into a fund used for the poor? Why is it that liberals have this, "I'm not going to help them unless everybody is forced to help them" attitude?
It's funny that liberals seem to always want to offer to have the rich pay more but they never seem to volunteer to pay more themselves. I can only assume it's selfishness for most.
Excellent posts. It is a shame the very logic you've presented here is what screws up the liberals heads. For some unexplained reason, they just can't accept simple logic. It's not in their forte and never will be, which is why arguing with them is just a moot point.
We can be grateful your views are reflective of a large number of people (mine included) and continue to fight for basic common sense and simple logic to prevail.
Excellent posts. It is a shame the very logic you've presented here is what screws up the liberals heads.
Quote:
With very few exceptions, this country gives equal access to get ahead.
It doesn't screw with liberal heads because what was written isn't logic, it's total nonsense. If it's not, then do you really believe that equal resources are given to the schools (let's take one simple example) in Brownsville and Southlake?
Secondly, people who say stuff like that are completely unaware of the hoops and difficulties you have to go through to even get state assistance, and yet they are also really angry they don't get the same thing.
Quote:
Why is it that liberals have this, "I'm not going to help them unless everybody is forced to help them" attitude?
Because we have this thing called 'society' that every person who epsouses this garbage seems to have forgotten about. Many years, Texas is a net receiver of Federal tax money, not a payer, so we are getting money from other states, and have the gall to talk about how independent we are. It's total garbage. The roads you drive on were subsidized, the gas you put in your car is subsidized -- you are not paying your own way, not even close.
Excellent posts. It is a shame the very logic you've presented here is what screws up the liberals heads. For some unexplained reason, they just can't accept simple logic. It's not in their forte and never will be, which is why arguing with them is just a moot point.
We can be grateful your views are reflective of a large number of people (mine included) and continue to fight for basic common sense and simple logic to prevail.
I'll never understand how a lot of anecdotal evidence, appeals to nature and asserting reality as though it cannot change is logic to conservatives. Common sense usually equals to "it is how it is because it is; human nature". It's a surface level explanation of things with no analysis.
This diehard belief that if you haven't made it into the middle class then you're just not trying hard enough. All the stats blow those misconceptions out of the water but those facts are always dismissed because of some personal subjective story the conservative has about their own life, what they've experienced and seen. They've seen lazy people at their high school and work so all those studies must be "flawed" and contain a "liberal" bias.
Can a conservative go one post without referring to their own life experiences as an argument? Everything always seems to boil down to about how they know because they've seen it, and assert that as "common sense" or "logic".
And no I'm not ignoring Pedro's post, it's just it contains all the elements I've been mentioning in my previous posts about conservatives. At the end of the day it's a debate about two polar opposite philosophical presuppositions.
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.
