Texas economy? (renting, crimes, attorney)

[Obrienlester]

Originally Posted by DTXman34

Let's see-- Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Arkansas, etc. are filled with similar Christofascist ideologues, but how well are they doing? Christofascism gave NC one big economic headache. TX is still fortunate to have some practical lawmakers and it's location does benefit it to some degree regardless of politics. Not all of TX is doing great -- mostly just the Texas Triangle, which includes a higher percentage of political diversity than the rest of the state.

TX has better access to resources. NC is STILL doing well economically despite what you might think. Low cost of living is still attractive to people and businesses as more people are still moving down South. How are those Northern liberal intolerant non-Christian states doing?

[Mr. Clutch]

Originally Posted by Obrienlester

TX has better access to resources. NC is STILL doing well economically despite what you might think. Low cost of living is still attractive to people and businesses as more people are still moving down South. How are those Northern liberal intolerant non-Christian states doing?

NC did have higher rates of GDP growth than most of the rest of the country during the last 5-6 years, and its true that this growth dipped only slightly in 2016.

With that being said, it's overly simplistic to say "X state does well because of its politics." Places like California, Oregon and Washington have done extremely well over the last 5 years or so, just as places like Texas, North Carolina, and Florida have. People have different priorities and things like taxes and cost of living aren't the end-all be-all to everyone. People tend to live where they want to live - politics and taxes have to be way out of line when compared with the norm for them to actually move for those reasons in most cases.

[DTXman34]

Originally Posted by Obrienlester

TX has better access to resources. NC is STILL doing well economically despite what you might think. Low cost of living is still attractive to people and businesses as more people are still moving down South. How are those Northern liberal intolerant non-Christian states doing?

As I said before, TX has better access to resources which has little to do with the politics of the state. Majority of the job growth, like in NC, are occurring in more politically diverse metros in their respective states, not out in the sea of bright fiery red.

Intolerant of what in the North? They're still majority Christian in those states, so I don't know where you're getting that information from. Lots of people there, especially in the older coal mining towns have a 1950s mindset on just about everything. PA & OH are not liberal states, but have cheap COL and not doing the greatest. Economically it's a rather complicated situation in those states, something that neither party could fully address. Depending on city/region of those states of course. How's Mississippi & Alabama doing?

[War Beagle]

Originally Posted by radiolibre99

Dems have two parties with the party: a neo-liberal centrist party with the Clintons, and a progressive social democratic wing with the Bernie camp.

Neo-liberals are pro globalization, centrist economically, liberal on social issues and mostly push identity politics.

Progressive Dems are leftward. They're like a Labour Party.

One thing you didn't mention is that the neo-liberals are giant warmongers.

Otherwise your post is extremely accurate. The neo-liberals are also the establishment. If you take away the identity politics, the establishment Republicans are not really any different than the Clinton Democrats. They might make conservative noises in even numbered years on social issues, but establishment Republicans like McCain and Graham have a very similar world view as the Clinton's.

What's fascinating is that Sanders and Trump are both manifestations of the same thing: the realization that the neo-liberals have no intention of improving things for anyone but themselves. Sanders and Trump approach the concern from different ideological positions, but the popularity of both men is due to the collapse in public trust of traditional elites.

The Texas economy will benefit if Texas Republicans move away from the 1990s social conservative model and towards a pragmatic libertarian conservatism.

[ikoolu]

there is no way moving left will be beneficial to anyone or your wallets - libertarian republican is another fancy word game used to hide behind - moving left will always cost you money - jobs and standard of living


don't be fooled by fancy names -progressive - democrats - left - what ever name you call it is all about one thing - how can they take more of your hard earned money and give it those who don't deserve it - just to make them feel good or get elected

politicians are hired by us to make hard choices - make them make those tough choices - don't give them any more money -its our - not theirs

[radiolibre99]

Originally Posted by War Beagle

One thing you didn't mention is that the neo-liberals are giant warmongers.

Otherwise your post is extremely accurate. The neo-liberals are also the establishment. If you take away the identity politics, the establishment Republicans are not really any different than the Clinton Democrats. They might make conservative noises in even numbered years on social issues, but establishment Republicans like McCain and Graham have a very similar world view as the Clinton's.

What's fascinating is that Sanders and Trump are both manifestations of the same thing: the realization that the neo-liberals have no intention of improving things for anyone but themselves. Sanders and Trump approach the concern from different ideological positions, but the popularity of both men is due to the collapse in public trust of traditional elites.

The Texas economy will benefit if Texas Republicans move away from the 1990s social conservative model and towards a pragmatic libertarian conservatism.

Bingo. Neoliberalism is pretty much establishment politics for both democrats and republicans.

[Slowpoke_TX]

Originally Posted by War Beagle

If you take away the identity politics, the establishment Republicans are not really any different than the Clinton Democrats. They might make conservative noises in even numbered years on social issues, but establishment Republicans like McCain and Graham have a very similar world view as the Clinton's.

What's fascinating is that Sanders and Trump are both manifestations of the same thing: the realization that the neo-liberals have no intention of improving things for anyone but themselves. Sanders and Trump approach the concern from different ideological positions, but the popularity of both men is due to the collapse in public trust of traditional elites.

Both paragraphs make excellent points.

[Slowpoke_TX]

Originally Posted by DTXman34

There's definitely a substantial amount in our govt. that is on the "far right" -- locally, statewide (especially in TX), and nationally.

Originally Posted by DTXman34

I disagree. Many would argue that Reagan wouldn't be elected in today's Republican Party. I agree there is more polarization at the extreme ends -- far left AND far right. There is definitely a far right.

I'm curious as to who you would categorize as "far right" and why, particularly at the national level.

[DTXman34]

Originally Posted by War Beagle

The Texas economy will benefit if Texas Republicans move away from the 1990s social conservative model and towards a pragmatic libertarian conservatism.

Exactly. I think you mean pre-1970s social conservative model, but yes I agree we need more pragmatic politicians.

[DTXman34]

Originally Posted by Slowpoke_TX

I'm curious as to who you would categorize as "far right" and why, particularly at the national level.

This is how I would categorize the Far Left and Far Right. They share some similarities, but completely different political views:

Similarities:
*Allegiance to an ideology. Little room for debate.
*The other side is viewed as the enemy.
*Anti-bipartisanship. No compromise.
*Both talk about "freedom," but freedom to one side is different to the other.
*Censorship of uncomfortable speech to that group

Far Left:
*Class warfare
*Identity Politics -- e.g. if you're a black or gay Republican, watch out!
*Tend to over-exaggerate the discrimination and suffering of certain groups
*Pro-Union to the point of shutting a business down (or holding the taxpayers hostage in the public sector)
*If you critique a social program or think it should be eliminated, they view you as heartless, greedy, anti-poor, racist, etc.
*Elitism, esp towards those that don't have at least a B.A. or B.S.
*Overemphasize the need to go to college and criticize any practical alternatives (e.g. vocational edu)

Far Right:
*Extreme nationalism - inability to critique American foreign policy without being labeled a traitor, anti-military.
*White Supremacy - whites are superior to other groups, over-exaggerate "reverse discrimination," and view other racial/ethnic groups as lazy and milking the system.
*Anti-Regulation/Taxes - Free reign for businesses to do whatever they want. Taxes are viewed as always high. Anti-union. They try to use this as a selling point (aka smaller govt, pro-freedom)
*Christofascism - Belief that there is no separation of church and state and that Christians should take over the gov't and govern based on their beliefs. All other religious groups are inferior. Extreme social conservatism.
*Anti-Science - Due to fundamentalist religious beliefs, it's difficult to debate evolution, climate change, homosexuality (something that can't be changed), etc.