Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 31 to 55 of 55

Thread: Why do blue states have higher education rates and less people below the poverty line?

  1. #31
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Land of Indians
    Posts
    25,613

    Default

    In Big Cities, Welfare , ( not, a handup , by private charity ) , is considered normal and acceptable , in smaller communities , it is not desired. In these cities , currently, there are huge populations of tax ticks that have been this way , and those before them in the family were as well. This was the example set for them. Only way you can possibly improve this ( break the cycle ) ? End all publicly funded Welfare. Simple as that . This is not possible , because the Socialist Politicians are in control ( enablers ) and there are enough recievers to out vote those that pay . The takers , out number , the producers.
    Last edited by oyarde; 11-09-2012 at 10:51 PM.



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #32
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Land of Indians
    Posts
    25,613

    Default

    Last time I looked , 20 % of LA County recvd some Welfare , if I recall , I grew up ,near a town of, slightly less than 50 K. I knew the guy who ran the Local United Way , he knew the name of all 90 some families in the County , on Welfare.

  4. #33
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Land of Indians
    Posts
    25,613

    Default

    The only way I see , for a correction, and it is needed , is for failure . Past , beyond the point where it may be obtained in the political process. That, is , just my guess ....

  5. #34
    Member Keith and stuff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    The Live Free or Die state
    Posts
    9,617
    Blog Entries
    69

    Default

    I don't know why people are better educated, less religious and modern socially liberal in certain states. It just is? And that just happens to be where most of the high tech centers and all of the financial centers are located.
    Lifetime member of more than 1 national gun organization and the New Hampshire Liberty Alliance. Part of Young Americans for Liberty and Campaign for Liberty. Free State Project participant and multi-year Free Talk Live AMPlifier.

  6. #35

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nasaal View Post
    Just wondering why this seems to be the case.
    I don't know if that is true. Utah and the Dakotas have some of the highest incomes and they are solidly red states.

    A more interesting point is why are states with the biggest unfunded public sector liabilities and biggest per capita budget short falls blue states? If you look at any list with any metric, eight or nine out of the top 10 states in the worst financial shape are blue states. The worst states like Illinois and California are solidly blue.

  7. #36

    Default

    I think you mean higher indoctrination to the collectivist system rates.

  8. #37
    Member Zippyjuan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Out Of This World
    Posts
    20,497

    Default

    One look:
    http://crooksandliars.com/blue-texan...d-states-are-c
    Of the top 10 states (and including DC) in per capita GDP, only two -- Alaska and Wyoming -- are Republican. And Alaska is heavily subsidized by the federal government.

    Of the bottom 10 states in per capita GDP, only two -- Michigan and New Mexico -- are Blue.

    So, 8 of the 10 most prosperous states are Blue, and 8 of the 10 poorest states are Red. A rather "stark difference in economic vitality," is it not?

    And there's more.

    Red states have higher rates of divorce, teen pregnancy, higher crime crates, and lower education levels than Blue states.

    So what gives?


    ...why haven't Republicans had more success rejuvenating the economies of deep red states? Why are so many deeply conservative states among the worst performers on a range of statistics, from output and income, to educational attainment, to life expectancy and literacy?
    Red states are also more likely to be net receivers of government benefits compared to the amount of tax dollars they send to Washington while blue states are more likely to be net contributors to the government.

    http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2012/02...federal-taxes/
    Last edited by Zippyjuan; 11-10-2012 at 06:07 PM.
    I am Zippy and I approve of this message. But you don't have to.

  9. #38

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zippyjuan View Post
    Red states are also more likely to be net receivers of government benefits compared to the amount of tax dollars they send to Washington while blue states are more likely to be net contributors to the government.
    Well, that would present a dichotomy, wouldn't it? Almost a glaring hypocrisy, were it not for the mind-numbingly fallacious implications, and for a number of reasons. The biggest of which is the conflation of VOTERS and STATE, as if they were the same thing. They are not. Another is the ridiculous aggregated "per capita" reckoning, with the bizarre implication that all voters in the state are somehow evenly distributed recipients and beneficiaries of state spending. They are not.

    Spending by state is all reckoned in the aggregate only. That's ALL federal funding to the state, which includes all federal outlays consisting of:

    • Retirement, disability, and other direct payments
    • Grants
    • Procurement
    • Salaries and wages


    That tells us absolutely nothing about which individuals in a particular state are receiving which benefits, if any. If a state has an enormous federal subsidy in an industry (public or private) that does not result in a benefit to the majority of the voting population (e.g., agriculture or energy), it would be completely disingenuous as well as intellectually dishonest to imply that the VOTERS (wrongly conflated being synonymous with STATE) are "net receivers of government benefits".

    Another obfuscating implication involved here, which is aided by a lack of any critical thought applied, is that per capita implies a kind of one-to-one Give vs. Receive-In-Return relationship. That's utter bullshit. The massive amounts of retirees living on pensions in Florida are paying out very little in Federal taxes, and receiving MASSIVE amounts--but not "in return".

    Furthermore, the amounts spent toward one beneficiary in a state is not necessarily an obligation on the parts of other citizens, of any state, let alone others, which are somehow being "subsidized" by taxpayers outside the state.

    Likewise those on disability and welfare. What you posted almost implies that there is more federal welfare spending per capita in Red States. Is that true? After all, we are looking BLUE VS. RED, and economic incentives for voting as a function of RECIPIENT benefits.

    A little critical thought and a quick drill-down on per capita federal welfare spending per state, and suddenly a different picture emerges. Alaska is actually number two, but it's exceptional and anomalous for a number of reasons. All the rest on the top ten are decidedly blue.

    1 - New York
    2 - Alaska
    3 - Rhode Island
    4 - Maine
    5 - Vermont
    6 - Massachusetts
    7 - Minnesota
    8 - Pennsylvania
    9 - New Mexico
    10 - Delaware


    Who are lowest ten per capita out of the fifty states?

    41 - Arizona
    42 - Michigan
    43 - South Dakota
    44 - Virginia
    45 - Utah
    46 - Montana
    47 - Georgia
    48 - Texas
    49 - Colorado
    50 - Nevada


    And out of those blue ones in the bottom ten, four are swing states. It's all a question of a willingness to stop aggregating and anthropomorphizing everything, and actually look under all the neatly labeled "State" rocks and see what is actually creepy-crawling underneath each one. Farmers in some red states get massive federal farm subsidies. Does it matter that they're in a distinct minority, or that most people in the state are not farmers, and do not receive a DIME in benefits? Likewise, federal payments to Native Populations? Give me a fucking break.

    The devil is not in the meaninglessly aggregated amounts, outgoing or incoming. It's all in the details of the actual distribution.

    The "Liars Figure" chart you posted has a disgusting title which asks "Do You Get Back More Than You Pay In Taxes?", because it implies that You=State.
    Last edited by Steven Douglas; 11-10-2012 at 07:18 PM.

  10. #39

    Default

    A friend posted this on FB and another of her friends immediately expressed indignation that she was so thoughtlessly insulting so many people. My friend (a customer, actually) works for a school system and is an Obama supporter.

    Last edited by Tod; 11-10-2012 at 07:15 PM.
    "Sorry, guys, the rebellion is off. We couldn't get a rebellion permit."
    "What is this, a home owner's association? Why the need to try and control other people's behavior?"



  11. #40

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zippyjuan View Post
    One look:
    http://crooksandliars.com/blue-texan...d-states-are-c


    Red states are also more likely to be net receivers of government benefits compared to the amount of tax dollars they send to Washington while blue states are more likely to be net contributors to the government.

    http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2012/02...federal-taxes/
    On that graphic, I think the second line is backwards. It should read "The Ratio of Benefits Received to Taxes Paid, by State"
    "Sorry, guys, the rebellion is off. We couldn't get a rebellion permit."
    "What is this, a home owner's association? Why the need to try and control other people's behavior?"



  12. #41

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tod View Post
    A friend posted this on FB and another of her friends immediately expressed indignation that she was so thoughtlessly insulting so many people. My friend (a customer, actually) works for a school system and is an Obama supporter.

    Awesome. It should read "Most State Indoctrinated" versus "Least State Indoctrinated". And once again, where did those degrees lead to, how were they obtained, and where is the breakdown on where all that "More Educated" bread is being buttered?

  13. #42

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Steven Douglas View Post
    Awesome. It should read "Most State Indoctrinated" versus "Least State Indoctrinated". And once again, where did those degrees lead to, how were they obtained, and where is the breakdown on where all that "More Educated" bread is being buttered?
    My interpretation, left unsaid, was that what it really illustrates is that, whether highly educated or not, most Americans are still falling for the false Left/Right paradigm.
    "Sorry, guys, the rebellion is off. We couldn't get a rebellion permit."
    "What is this, a home owner's association? Why the need to try and control other people's behavior?"



  14. #43
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Land of Indians
    Posts
    25,613

    Default

    There are some sound economic reasons for two of those states , right off the top of my head without thinking about it . West Virginia , jobs , are coal , so even though they are likely , mostly reg.'d Dems, they do not vote for the coal Terrorist Obummer. Indiana , about 20 % of the jobs are good mnfg jobs that require no degree .Thus , less education, and in that state, education likely to pay off less.They are in the top ten in student debt already, in school there now ? in this economy, wasted money.
    Last edited by oyarde; 11-10-2012 at 08:15 PM.

  15. #44
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Land of Indians
    Posts
    25,613

    Default

    Moving further to a couple more , Maryland, New York , are commie states, no suprise there .....maybe , the only two that there is no definitive answer for , would be New Hampshire & Colorado ....

  16. #45

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Steven Douglas View Post
    Awesome. It should read "Most State Indoctrinated" versus "Least State Indoctrinated". And once again, where did those degrees lead to, how were they obtained, and where is the breakdown on where all that "More Educated" bread is being buttered?
    Stalin and Marx were intellectual leaders, IIRC.
    .[QUOTE]"Every great new thought was opposed. Every great new invention was denounced. The first motor was considered foolish. The airplane was considered impossible. The power loom was considered vicious. Anesthesia was considered sinful. But the men of unborrowed vision went ahead. They fought, they suffered and they paid. But they won." - Ayn Rand, The Fountainhead[/QUOTE]
    ..
    .

    I blog at Red State Eclectic, and I tweet here,.

  17. #46
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Land of Indians
    Posts
    25,613

    Default

    I have never lived in Nevada, but , suspect its politics are controlled by the Dems and Service Union... who probably outnumber the normal people ...

  18. #47

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tod View Post
    A friend posted this on FB and another of her friends immediately expressed indignation that she was so thoughtlessly insulting so many people. My friend (a customer, actually) works for a school system and is an Obama supporter.

    I wonder what the student debt per capita per state looks like... hmmm.
    Stop the Looting and Start Prosecuting! Gold plated Tungsten IS Money!
    We Must Dissent A colher não existe.
    A government is just a body of people, notably, usually, ungoverned.

    "You mean this entire war started because The Empire dressed as the enemy? That's exactly what happened in the last major war! Our government is so stupid!"

  19. #48

    Default

    Not in US but "highger education" is not always translated into useful knowledge...

    "Aroma therapist", "Fashion guru","English literature doctor" (which reminded me of terrible accidents and aroma therapist comes screaming let me through i am aroma therapist ill save him...)..... we need them (maybe) but not so many of them. maybe 1 in a 200.000 but not 1 in a 1000.
    So you gave up on this:
    H
    elp with documenting voting rights violations and election fraud abuses!?
    Shame. Nothing encourages crime than not punishing it. You are letting them get away with it.FAIL.


    Quote Originally Posted by orenbus View Post
    If I had to answer this question truthfully I'd probably piss a lot of people off lol, Barrex would be a better person to ask he doesn't seem to care lol.


  20. #49
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Land of Indians
    Posts
    25,613

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Barrex View Post
    Not in US but "highger education" is not always translated into useful knowledge...

    "Aroma therapist", "Fashion guru","English literature doctor" (which reminded me of terrible accidents and aroma therapist comes screaming let me through i am aroma therapist ill save him...)..... we need them (maybe) but not so many of them. maybe 1 in a 200.000 but not 1 in a 1000.
    I do not see much useful knowledge coming from large population centers, now that you mention it .....

  21. #50
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Land of Indians
    Posts
    25,613

    Default

    So , really , educated, overall = socialist =retarded......

  22. #51
    Member Zippyjuan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Out Of This World
    Posts
    20,497

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tod View Post
    On that graphic, I think the second line is backwards. It should read "The Ratio of Benefits Received to Taxes Paid, by State"
    According to the bottom of the chart it shows "Benefits received from the Federal Government for Every Dollar Paid in Federal Taxes"

    Another is the ridiculous aggregated "per capita" reckoning, with the bizarre implication that all voters in the state are somehow evenly distributed recipients and beneficiaries of state spending. They are not.
    The "per capita" is important because it allows you to compare less populous states with more populous ones. You are right it does not describe every person- that is impossible to list all 300 million people so it looks at the average person which is a very valid way to compare.
    I am Zippy and I approve of this message. But you don't have to.

  23. #52

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by oyarde View Post
    In Big Cities, Welfare , ( not, a handup , by private charity ) , is considered normal and acceptable , in smaller communities , it is not desired. In these cities , currently, there are huge populations of tax ticks that have been this way , and those before them in the family were as well. This was the example set for them. Only way you can possibly improve this ( break the cycle ) ? End all publicly funded Welfare. Simple as that . This is not possible , because the Socialist Politicians are in control ( enablers ) and there are enough recievers to out vote those that pay . The takers , out number , the producers.
    That, and ending welfare really isn't popular. It's not quite as bad as the Third Rail (social security), but it's pretty nasty.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ron Paul
    The government is incapable of doing what it's supposed to do. A job like the provision of security is something best left to private institutions.
    My music/art page is here"government is the enemy of liberty"-RP
    That which doesn't kill me has made a grave tactical error
    Quote Originally Posted by Anti Federalist View Post
    This whole board is a thoughtcrime in progress.
    Quote Originally Posted by danke View Post
    I carry my man purse for fashion, not function.

  24. #53

    Default

    I just wish it was not red and blue and had other colors on those charts i.e green for Libertarian. That would start ending some of this chaos and move us towards the right direction.
    Last edited by QuickZ06; 11-12-2012 at 12:54 PM.
    "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness"

  25. #54

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zippyjuan View Post
    The "per capita" is important because it allows you to compare less populous states with more populous ones. You are right it does not describe every person- that is impossible to list all 300 million people so it looks at the average person which is a very valid way to compare.
    "per capita" is a valid way of eliminating an improper comparison (relative population sizes). But that is only for a starting point for real comparisons that are never made, with data that are completely meaningless without a further breakdown. Take income, for example. INCOME FROM WHERE? Is it publicly or privately sourced? And out of the privately derived sources, are they publicly distorted, and are there any artificial economic advantages provided or enforced by the state? And if so, which kind of state? Would a vote for Blue be personally and potentially more advantageous than a vote for Red? If you're an "educated" but unionized auto worker in Detroit, do think the possibility of subsidies, bailouts, and any legislation that is pro-union might just affect your vote just a teensy bit?

    Likewise, "education" is meaningless in the absolute without a further breakdown. Knowing that people are "more educated" is meaningless without knowing WHAT they are 'more educated' about, what careers and income sources are the result, and to which available POOLS these 'more educated' people are likely to drink from afterward. "Education", even "per capita", is treated as if it was some kind of homogenous "Education Level Soup" that everyone was ladling from a single Education Vat. That's utter BS. Is a PhD in art history, with an emphasis on ancient Central African tribal art, comparable in any way to a B.S. in business administration? How about a Masters degree in Social Services versus an Associate Degree in mechanical engineering? All of these conflated, and yet can they even be compared?

  26. #55
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Land of Indians
    Posts
    25,613

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by QuickZ06 View Post
    I just wish it was not red and blue and had other colors on those charts i.e green for Libertarian. That would start ending some of this chaos and move us towards the right direction.
    You could do that by counties, but only if you polled beliefs , not votes. You would end , in the same result , only rural areas, independent people , self worth , no cities ,socialists . The experiment , has failed. I accept it.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12




« Previous Thread | Next Thread »


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •