Sorry, dude, I’m already here. Georgia resident. Native Georgian on both sides of my family too. You’re probably a carpetbagger by my standards.
Follow the numbers, dude. The underclass is being created by the one percent who are grabbing all the wealth, and who push conservatism (they don’t really have any political beliefs, they just use them as tools). One of the things Progressive Mississippi would do is make it a lot harder for the one percent to steal everything in the store.
But the urban underclass of today dates from the 1960s, before the Great Divergence in income equality in the late 1970s. How do you explain this?
Did you even read my post or do you see me post in a state government related thread and just reflexively barrage me with these silly tropes?
Eh. Which side put all those federal programs in place? Kindly repeal rhem if they bother you.
Ok I should have mentioned that this idea wouldn’t align with today’s “conservatism” either, but that wasn’t the topic of the thread. I was just trying to point out the irony of progressives “taking over” a state when their history shows that they seek ever more power at higher and higher levels of government.
And I was pointing out the irony of you implying that only progressives do that, when conservatives do it too.
Which means your point has no point.
[quote=“ITR_champion, post:58, topic:649318”]
Laying aside the issues that others have mentioned, I have to wonder whether you understand government in America at all. Of the things you want to implement, most can’t be implemented at the state level because the federal government won’t allow it. Some small changes, such as issuing marriage certificates to gay couples, could be made without difficulty. But meaningful changes are off the table without major changes to the federal government. For instance:
[LIST]
[li]A well-funded progressive public school system. America’s public schools are just about the most well-funded in world history, so you can’t complain there, but changing their structure to imitate Finland’s can’t happen. The No Child Left Behind Act put the federal government in charge of many administrative decisions at schools and required high-stakes testing. President Obama has continued the trend by creating a national standardized curriculum; it’s not mandatory yet, but it soon will be. It’s against federal law for a state to make its education system Finnish.[/li][/quote]
There is already a movement to dump No Child Left Behind so I’m not really that worried about it. It will take time to implement, the Finnish took 40 years to set up their system, I’m cool with that so long as we move in the right direction.
[quote]
[li]Marijuana. The Obama Administration continues to raid and arrest people distributing pot for medical purposes, even in states that have voted for legalization.[/li][/quote]
Sure, the Obama Administration is being a big Drug Warrior to keep the conservatives happy, or maybe it’s just bureaucratic inertia, I dunno. But the states should DEFINITELY keep legalizing marijuana, because you know what: when 38 states have legalized marijuana, it’s gonna make the people in Washington very, very nervous.
[quote]
[li]Health care. The numerous financial requirements surrounding Medicare, Medicaid, and the PPACA would make it extremely difficult to create a separate state single-payer system from scratch.[/li][/quote]
Sure, difficult. But Vermont seems to have managed it. Why not Mississippi?
[quote]
[li]Environmental legislation. States wishing to push strong environmental regulations often get blocked by the federal government. For instance, about 10 years ago California and New York tried requiring that car companies sell zero-emissions cars in those states. Lobbyists for the car and oil companies used their influence in Washington to block it.[/li][/quote]
Once again, moving in the right direction is enough. Plus, we might take a page from the anti-abortion playbook and regulate those industries senseless and drive them either into compliance or out of the state, through RIGOROUS enforcement of regulations and perhaps the creation of new ones that are not under the purview of the Feds.
The urban underclass is a small minority now. The new underclass is the middle class.
Those are the poor. The middle class are becoming the new underclass - not poor, but just barely. and not likely to move up.
I’m pretty sure it’s old Drug Warriors from the 80s that Obama was too stupid to clean out that have created this aggressive policy against state marijuana legalization. And I’m not sure the federal government is the hotbed of progressivism you seem to think it is. Reagan and the Bushes made a LOT of appointments.
Progressive political views skew young, well-educated, and possibly well-compensated. What does MS offer those demographics? It’s hot, humid, the beaches are so-so, there is a dearth of jobs for the creative class, and the locals sound un-fun to be around. Not easy to build a recruiting video out of “As tree-covered as many other places, but more churches and no snow, we promise”.
If someone with a newly printed degree wants a pleasant climate and natural beauty, they can go to NC. Which already has established employers, a full range of housing options from big city to rural, and a far more cosmopolitan culture than most of the gulf coast. What is the MS equivalent of the Triangle, Asheville, or the entire freaking NC Atlantic coast?
We need to start a Dharma Initiative for Mississippi. We can recruit people and tell them they are going to Portland.
What I am saying is that what gets labelled as “progressive” in the USA is so fucking common sense and milquetoast that it should be labelled as “basic civics” instead. Universal healthcare works, and delivers more healthcare cheaper, and nobody who has it would prefer the American system. So calling it “progressive” is a bit odd IMO.
Wanting the USA to have a strictly defensive military force instead of worldwide police is so bizarre an idea here, that even in the supposedly lefty SDMB you get called a lot of names and laughed at for thinking we shouldn’t spend as much on our military as the entire rest of the world combined. It is an ingrained idea in Americans to let American people, education, science, and infrastructure fester while spending like it’s going out of style on the military.
These ideas get labelled progressive only because Americans are so stupid. Your idea is more to overtake a state with non-mental defectives/non brainwashed by Fox News citizens, not so much “progressive”, you couldn’t take over even the smallest states with actual lefty progressives who believe in actual progress like a strictly defensive military and spending the difference on science and social programs, there aren’t any.
Actually, Florida is a “purple state” – went for Obama in 2008 and 2012, many Dem governors in the past, but, at present, the governorship and both houses of the state legislature are controlled by Pubs, most notably Grown-Up Bat Boy Rick Scott. That’s why all the voter-access/voter-suppression issues were so hot here in 2012 – most elections are that tight here, could go either way, and a few voters turned away or not could decide it. Scott beat Sink in 2010 by just 1%, IIRC.
An influx of progressives just might make all the difference, here.
Yes, I read your post; it went:
To which:
is a fitting response; though, of course, the “rapists” bit was in response to
and
This round to me, Will.
Or else, very, very relaxed. 
If Obama is doing that or anything to keep the conservatives happy, it’s not working. Conservatives as a group are not very happy with him.
To me it seems more likely that Obama and Congressional Democrats continue the War on Drugs in order to keep liberals happy.
I believe you missed my main point.
The trend in federal government spending, as a share of the economy, has been upward since 2000. Federal power has vastly increased as well, though it’s harder to quantify. The federal government is very good at increasing its size and power. It is not that good at decreasing its size and power. Indeed I’m hard pressed to name any instance where it’s done so other than after major wars, when those drafted into the military returned home.
At the present time, the federal government holds control over everything from public schools to farm policy to environmental regulation. It shows little interest in relinquishing that control and letting states have that power, much less in giving individuals more power. You think that No Child Left Behind will be dumped. I doubt it. How many major pieces of federal legislation can you name that have been truly eliminated in the past generation without being replaced by something similar? The federal government has the power. The states do not.
I’m pretty sure farm subsidies and defense spending are either bipartisan or supported by red-staters. Red states do recieve more welfare for the poor, which would be a good point except that it’s also a bogeyman on the part of anti-blue staters to claim that they are being sucked dry to support California and New York and the usual suspects, which is exactly backwards. You could equally say “don’t like supporting California and New York? Kindly repeal these programss if they bother you.”
However, it’s true that red states get more social security money proportionately, I believe, so there is vaguely a point there, but it is still not as simple as bleating “Californias taxes are so high but they still can’t balance their budget herp a derp!”
You have obviously never experienced the enjoyment of embodying the worst stereotypes of liberals with a straight face when talking to conservatives. I do it all the time with my family.
“I hope Obama raises dad’s taxes so he can use the money for slavery reparations”
“If we made guns illegal with a 1 strike and you’re out policy, I bet 80% of crime would go away”
Sometimes I just make facts up, that is fun too. ‘According to the wall street journal the stimulus created 9 million jobs’ or ‘even Romney’s former campaign manager admitted on face the nation that Obama’s economic policy was better’.
Not here mind you, because I know making up facts isn’t kosher here.