It’s a point, but it’s wrong. Someone’s dump up the river in the middle of nowhere ends up in water supply of a dense area. The air works similarly too – the particles spewed out by the Chinese factories can be detected on the west coast of the USA. We basically live in a closed system that can absorb some damage. It doesn’t matter how populated the area is around that damage.
1 Like
Hey at least you agree he wouldn’t have been a Republican.
What happened 10 years ago that would have upset him so much? Obamacare? It’s really not that radical.
Yeah OK but the question was why Lincoln wouldn’t have liked it 
1 Like
True, I don’t see why Lincoln wouldn’t have supported the government providing leeches to cure everyone’s health ailments. Seems like a basic service he’d support.
1 Like
Yeah, questioning her citizenship/eligibility is absolutely asinine at several levels. She was born HERE!!
There are any number of legitimate reasons to object to Kamala’s politics. Questioning her eligibility is pure BS. It is stupid.
2 Likes
You’re right about that. Most Republicans are busy working, or trying to figure out how to survive when they’re jobs have been yanked due to draconian acts of fear … or their businesses have been closed, while their rents and other costs continue to pile up, including taxes. When they finish with that, they get to spend time with their children. 
Oops! Should have cleared that up earlier. It did mean Public School (number of school). Today, when rioters are described as peaceful protesters, it must mean something completely different and false, … and probably vulgar. 
He has been a voting Democrat in Cook County since the early 60’s. After this presidential election, I suspect he will be a voting Democrat in several hundred counties, primarily in swing states.
1 Like
IIRC, you supported Ted Cruz. If so, I understand your above position.
This is false. Today most remaining Republican voters are unemployed, living off of state welfare (Medicare and social security), and unfortunately most are doing nothing except watching TV all day. With guaranteed income they have no fear of loss of (social security).
In most areas, property taxes are also oddly held artificially low for these people with guaranteed income (with built in COLA increases) and subsidized by the working class. They don’t go “up and up” for them like you state, they only go up and up for everyone else.
I’m not advocating change in either direction on these social programs, but the picture you describe of an average “Republican” is false. It’s actually the group with the LOWEST employment numbers, not the highest.
I won’t go on with the rest of your post. Absolutely FALSE… Honkinggoose is CORRECT!!!
1 Like
You mean enjoying the retirement benefits they paid for and then some? Thinking that social security is a “free benefit” or “welfare” is both a bad way of thinking and a poor economic assessment of the situation. Or were you talking about non-retired people? because red state employment was definitely better than blue or mixed pre-virus.
https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/477923-a-gop-led-edge-red-states-see-less-unemployment-more-economic-growth
https://unemploymentdata.com/unemployment/unemployment-by-state-and-political-party/
I would expect the blue state unemployment is even worse comparatively since then as the more urban areas have been hit harder by the virus, are more locked down, etc, so there are fewer jobs than in less urban (and more republican) areas.
1 Like
It’s a pay go system. It’s actually not paid for by those receiving benefits but by current workers. Just how it is, not how I’m arguing it should be. I agree with you on how it should be thought of. And the government should not steal the funds from SS as they come in and then treat it like straight welfare when funds are paid out. But things are often how they are, not always how I feel they should be. (Unemployment Insurance… On the other hand… is directly earned and paid for.) Social security benefits are also highly progressive and redistributive (even if we pretend it’s not pay-go). It’s not a linear relationship between benefit levels and previous income years.
Again I wasn’t arguing against social security. It’s clearly a social program though.
The main point I was making is it’s guaranteed income, not people “worried about losing their jobs”. Honking said most Republicans are busy working or trying to figure out how to survive because of “draconian” virus response. “Retired” or Medicaid/SSDI people are neither, regardless if they were in the past.
yeah, that group is probably trying to figure out where they can reinvest that 3% CD that matured for more than 0.8% thanks to all the financial repression stimulus going on. Watching the purchasing power of your saving erode and not being able to even match inflation (before taxes) on risk free investments puts savers and retirees at risk financially as well. Them perhaps moreso than marginal workers too, who can get unemployment and whose job market should recover in due course. with all the trillions being printed, I doubt real rates recover any time soon, and even later looks very unclear.
Savers seems like a separate issue (off track from the claim about fear of job loss, which does not apply to retirees), but there aren’t that many heavy savers.
Due to compounding, shouldn’t low long term rates have an outsized effect on the people with the longest time horizons who aren’t drawing down on the principle? (Younger people, still working) As opposed to retirees who generally have a much shorter time horizon and are generally already primarily drawing down on the principal?
Have you ever been to West Virginia @pattyb53??? Clearly you have not and are out of touch with middle America Republicans look like - think Tennessee, Kentucky etc. in addition to West Virginia which when combined with other southern states are a large part of the base of the Republican party and a very large part of the makeup of the winning electoral college map. Social security disability, Medicaid, food stamps, and other social programs are used heavily in these states and you can absolutely trust and believe that the majority waiting in the welfare lines identify as Republicans and Trumpers.
3 Likes
7mins 10secs “Go sign up for a check.”
1 Like
It is no shock Trump is favored in Appalachia where fossil fuel development underpins the economies of several states in significant measure.
Trump is supportive of such development. Democrats generally stand vigorously in opposition. Those people do not have a lot. Take away fossil fuel development and they will be hurting even worse than they are now. And they are well aware of this.
Yes I agree @shinobi, but ultimately these people would rather live on the government’s teet than go elsewhere and find work and while doing so they make up a big chunk of the core of the Republican party in many places in the south. Of course rich white people usually make up the other part of that core in many of those states. It’s a very interesting sociologically actually.
I think they would, more than anything else, just like to be able to work and raise their families. But I do agree they are generally averse to living elsewhere. This is because many have very long family histories where they presently reside. It is “home”. That is not something with which I find fault. To the contrary, I find it an admirable trait; very American.
1 Like
Good to see another Republican who finds those living on the government’s teet, despite opportunities elsewhere which would allow them to instead be self reliant, very American.
1 Like