If right-wing conservativism is so great, why do their states suck?

[Qin_Shi_Huangdi]

@curlcoat

Then, Germany is not a “far more robust welfare state” as Qin Shi Huangdi said? I really have no idea either way, since I don’t feel there is any way one can compare success or failure in one country to what is going on in a second country. There are simply too many variables.

Germany has a bunch of other of social welfare programs (such as for example a universal health care system) that are far better than anything we have here. In addition,

Or they might criticize it as I do - a really bad idea. I worked with the government doing Medicaid and Medicare payments and the level of stupid, incompetence and fraud there could never even be approached by any insurance company.

That seems scary, given the US equivalent - civil service.

Well, of course their employment rate is lower, if it’s hard to fire them.

I wouldn’t know - I’m not a Republican, nor do I follow what any of the talking heads are saying.

Fair enough but most of your arguments are basically Republican talking points that have been used for the last generation.

Because it’s cause=effect for me, due to having lived for years among, and as, a very poor person. Shoot, if nothing else, these days one can make more on the dole than working an entry level job, but I also saw a whole generation of people grow up with the attitude that they were owed whatever they wanted, and that they should have it when they wanted it. Granted, that was decades ago in another state, but even here and living middle class, I still see people who have things that I can’t afford buying their groceries and fast food with EBT. People running up debt and then just defaulting. People who state that their safety net is the government. These are not people who feel they need to be responsible for themselves.

Irresponsibility is a result of degenerated values in American society as a whole and not limited to the poor. The wealthy are quite guilty of it also and their cost to the economy is far worse.

And as I’ve said Americans work longer hours and in poorer conditions than German workers.

So essentially, they are admitting they don’t know.

We can’t know for certain, but one can exprapolate with some reason. I’m pretty sure people would notice if there were 30 million or 50 million illegal immigrants.

Uh no. The best way to counter further immigration is to figure out some way to get Mexico to not be a third world country. Progress has been made in Tijuana, but the people themselves need education and birth control for a start.

That too obviously but that would require not cutting foreign aid.

As we cannot know how many illegals are actually here, neither can we know how many have forged papers so they can get welfare and other handouts.

By that logic we can’t know how much money wealthy businessmen are hiding in offshore accounts or simply cheatingg in taxes.

Even if they don’t have MediCal, if they end up in the emergency room, they are still going to cost less than if MediCal pays to birth and raise all of their children and DentiCal pays to take care of their teeth.
[/QUOTE]

Illegal immigrants are not stupid: most of them realize if they want to get ahead in life, it makes little financial sense to have seven or eight kids, far outweighing any benefits they receive from the government. If this were not the case, birth-rates should have boomed in country after country when welfare legislation was instituted but it did not, instead falling. Not to mention that health insurance that provides birth control will serve to further reduce birth-rates.

And you don’t think people with horrible cavity end up in emergency rooms?

This business of people without insurance ending up costing us so much by using the ER seems to be a red herring anyway. I’ve lately ended up sitting in ERs and only saw maybe 15% of the people who came get anything more than an exam and some drugs. Far far cheaper than paying for well visits, allergy shots, physical therapy, eye doctors and on and on - all of the things that regular insurance covers and people, especially those with young children, tend to use.

Its that 15% that drive most of the costs.

Why would states want to attract low-wage businesses?

Largely in the hopes of tax revenue and creating jobs although as a result most jobs end up being low-paying, shitty jobs.

[rogerbox]

QSH looks like your post got messed up somehow. I’m not sure why you are bothering though.

[curlcoat]

Somehow the coding on this got messed up, so I’m going to cut out those parts.

@Qin_Shi_Huangdi

Germany has a bunch of other of social welfare programs (such as for example a universal health care system) that are far better than anything we have here.

Better how, for who? As I said, I know nothing about Germany’s welfare system except what has been said here - what percentage of the people there are living on the system? What sort of taxes do they pay? What condition are their roads, building, etc in?

Fair enough but most of your arguments are basically Republican talking points that have been used for the last generation.

And I imagine much of what you say is Democratic talking points. What I do know is that I resent spending decades pulling myself up out of the mud only to find out that you all expect us to cut into our retirement in order to support people whose only accomplishment seems to be to not use birth control and spend money they don’t have.

Irresponsibility is a result of degenerated values in American society as a whole and not limited to the poor. The wealthy are quite guilty of it also and their cost to the economy is far worse.

How is that? The wealthy are not expecting me to send them money.

And as I’ve said Americans work longer hours and in poorer conditions than German workers.

I’m not sure what that has to do with the subject.

We can’t know for certain, but one can exprapolate with some reason. I’m pretty sure people would notice if there were 30 million or 50 million illegal immigrants.

Quite so. However, not knowing if we have - what was it? - 4 million or 12 million? is quite a wide gap. And it’s not as if they are evenly distributed.

That too obviously but that would require not cutting foreign aid.

No, the government of the US is not the only place that sort of thing can come from. Or, they can cut foreign aid to countries that don’t border us.

By that logic we can’t know how much money wealthy businessmen are hiding in offshore accounts or simply cheatingg in taxes.

We don’t - that’s why raising taxes on the rich isn’t going to create much income.

Illegal immigrants are not stupid: most of them realize if they want to get ahead in life, it makes little financial sense to have seven or eight kids, far outweighing any benefits they receive from the government. If this were not the case, birth-rates should have boomed in country after country when welfare legislation was instituted but it did not, instead falling. Not to mention that health insurance that provides birth control will serve to further reduce birth-rates.

Illegals from Mexico are still overwhelmingly Catholic and male run. The smallest number of children in my neighborhood (I think most of ours are legals) is three, and that family is still young so may not be done having kids. Birth rates don’t mean anything unless they are confined to the target group, and looking at results from decades ago means nothing. It doesn’t matter if insurance provides birth control if one’s religion and husband don’t allow it.

And you don’t think people with horrible cavity end up in emergency rooms?

I didn’t say they weren’t there, I said that it appeared that the vast majority of them only get very basic care there and then are sent home.

Its that 15% that drive most of the costs.

That was 15% of everyone I saw in there - I have no idea who did or did not have insurance, tho no one got past the waiting room without insurance unless they were in danger of dying or in severe pain.

Largely in the hopes of tax revenue and creating jobs although as a result most jobs end up being low-paying, shitty jobs.

Then they wouldn’t be getting much in taxes. There is no reason for states to be wanting to attract low paying jobs.

[Qin_Shi_Huangdi]

[QUOTE=curlcoat;16754875

Better how, for who? As I said, I know nothing about Germany’s welfare system except what has been said here - what percentage of the people there are living on the system? What sort of taxes do they pay? What condition are their roads, building, etc in?[/QUOTE]

I was using Germany as an example. Information on this sort of stuff is easily accessible on Wikipedia.

And I imagine much of what you say is Democratic talking points. What I do know is that I resent spending decades pulling myself up out of the mud only to find out that you all expect us to cut into our retirement in order to support people whose only accomplishment seems to be to not use birth control and spend money they don’t have.

So you never used government aid programs when you were poor?

How is that? The wealthy are not expecting me to send them money.

What do you think the bank bailout was?

I’m not sure what that has to do with the subject.

My point is that American workers are not lazier then German workers.

Quite so. However, not knowing if we have - what was it? - 4 million or 12 million? is quite a wide gap. And it’s not as if they are evenly distributed.

Most estimates trend toward the higher end of the estimate.

No, the government of the US is not the only place that sort of thing can come from. Or, they can cut foreign aid to countries that don’t border us.

The US spends much less on foreign aid then other countries and as you said yourself, some foreign aid now will save much more in the long run.

We don’t - that’s why raising taxes on the rich isn’t going to create much income.

True which is why tax reform should include cracking down on deductions and similar stuff.

Illegals from Mexico are still overwhelmingly Catholic and male run. The smallest number of children in my neighborhood (I think most of ours are legals) is three, and that family is still young so may not be done having kids. Birth rates don’t mean anything unless they are confined to the target group, and looking at results from decades ago means nothing. It doesn’t matter if insurance provides birth control if one’s religion and husband don’t allow it.

May I ask where this neighbourhood is? And most Catholic don’t give a crap about their Church’s teachings on birth control (certainly most Irish and Italian Catholics in America don’t) so education about birth control along with rising prosperity will result in a natural decline in birth-rates just like for every immigrant group in America.
I didn’t say they weren’t there, I said that it appeared that the vast majority of them only get very basic care there and then are sent home.

That was 15% of everyone I saw in there - I have no idea who did or did not have insurance, tho no one got past the waiting room without insurance unless they were in danger of dying or in severe pain.

So in other words you think we should wait until they are severly sick or dying to send them to the ER rather than preventing those problems beforehand?

Then they wouldn’t be getting much in taxes. There is no reason for states to be wanting to attract low paying jobs.

That is true but many government officials mistakenly think otherwise.

[curlcoat]

@Qin_Shi_Huangdi

I was using Germany as an example. Information on this sort of stuff is easily accessible on Wikipedia.

Wiki will not tell me why you think it’s better.

So you never used government aid programs when you were poor?

Not welfare. The only government money I got was unemployment for less than six months total.

If nothing else, apparently you are unaware that the government - society - couldn’t care less if a person starved to death if they didn’t have any children?

What do you think the bank bailout was?

It wasn’t a bailout of the wealthy.

My point is that American workers are not lazier then German workers.

Your point isn’t supported by saying that we have worse conditions here. Not that I’m sure that is true.

Most estimates trend toward the higher end of the estimate.

OK

The US spends much less on foreign aid then other countries and as you said yourself, some foreign aid now will save much more in the long run.

Not the way the US spends it.

True which is why tax reform should include cracking down on deductions and similar stuff.

OK, lets start with no longer rewarding people for having children.

May I ask where this neighbourhood is? And most Catholic don’t give a crap about their Church’s teachings on birth control (certainly most Irish and Italian Catholics in America don’t) so education about birth control along with rising prosperity will result in a natural decline in birth-rates just like for every immigrant group in America.

Ireland and Italy are not third world countries at this time, Mexico is. Unless and until they quit having piles of kids they can’t afford, uneducated and unskilled Mexicans, here or there, are not going to have much of a chance to rise in prosperity. Sure, once the next generation grows up here things change for them, but the problem is that we keep getting more and more of the immigrants who still believe in the old ways.

You really don’t know much about what is going on down here, so you?

So in other words you think we should wait until they are severly sick or dying to send them to the ER rather than preventing those problems beforehand?

Yup. If they are here illegally, I don’t see how they are our responsibility.

That is true but many government officials mistakenly think otherwise.

What do you base that opinion on?

[Qin_Shi_Huangdi]

@curlcoat

Wiki will not tell me why you think it’s better.

Great income equality, higher life-spans, reduced health-care costs etc.

Not welfare. The only government money I got was unemployment for less than six months total.

If nothing else, apparently you are unaware that the government - society - couldn’t care less if a person starved to death if they didn’t have any children?

How so? And that just means welfare programs should be expanded?

It wasn’t a bailout of the wealthy.

Of course it was. I don’t see migrant fruitworkers on the bank’s board of directors.

Your point isn’t supported by saying that we have worse conditions here. Not that I’m sure that is true.

OK

Not the way the US spends it.

That is just a question of how to manage foreign aid.

OK, lets start with no longer rewarding people for having children.

I’d rather we start with tax deductions that benefit the wealthy rather than those that benefit the working class.

Ireland and Italy are not third world countries at this time, Mexico is. Unless and until they quit having piles of kids they can’t afford, uneducated and unskilled Mexicans, here or there, are not going to have much of a chance to rise in prosperity. Sure, once the next generation grows up here things change for them, but the problem is that we keep getting more and more of the immigrants who still believe in the old ways.

You really don’t know much about what is going on down here, so you?

Mexico isn’t a “Third World Country” and its birthrate is around 2.2-2.3 which is just above the replacement rate.

Yup. If they are here illegally, I don’t see how they are our responsibility.

My system of morals dictates otherwise.

What do you base that opinion on?

Based on the “pro-business” policies of many states and localities.

[curlcoat]

@Qin_Shi_Huangdi

Great income equality, higher life-spans, reduced health-care costs etc.

OK, I’ll give up on why you think that Germany is doing so well since you apparently are unable to give a straight answer. I begin to think that all you know about that country is what you have read in Wiki.

How so? And that just means welfare programs should be expanded?

How so what? That one cannot get Medicaid or food stamps or any of that unless one has children? You didn’t know that? And no, it doesn’t mean welfare should be expanded, all it does is make even more people dependent on the system.

Of course it was. I don’t see migrant fruitworkers on the bank’s board of directors.

That is your reasoning that the bank bailout was to save the wealthy?

That is just a question of how to manage foreign aid.

True. If we did a better job, I probably wouldn’t be so against it.

I’d rather we start with tax deductions that benefit the wealthy rather than those that benefit the working class.

Deductions for children benefit all parents.

Mexico isn’t a “Third World Country” and its birthrate is around 2.2-2.3 which is just above the replacement rate.

Never been there, have you?

My system of morals dictates otherwise.

That’s nice, but then you aren’t paying for them, are you?

Based on the “pro-business” policies of many states and localities.

Pro-business doesn’t translate into pro fast food jobs only.

[Qin_Shi_Huangdi]

@curlcoat

OK, I’ll give up on why you think that Germany is doing so well since you apparently are unable to give a straight answer. I begin to think that all you know about that country is what you have read in Wiki.

I gave you some metrics in which Germany does better.

How so what? That one cannot get Medicaid or food stamps or any of that unless one has children? You didn’t know that? And no, it doesn’t mean welfare should be expanded, all it does is make even more people dependent on the system.

I was uncertain as to the extent of this practice.

And it means that everybody should at least have a minimum health care and food assistance.

That is your reasoning that the bank bailout was to save the wealthy?

Yes. To elaborate, it is the people who run the banks, and those running related financial operations that such as those investing in corporations that form the core of the ultra-wealthy in the United States who were greatly aided by the fact that the banks did not go under.

Deductions for children benefit all parents.

Not really. If you have say $5,000,000 dollars in income, a few thousand dollars less in taxes is not really noticeable but if you have $25,000 it makes a big difference.

Never been there, have you?

Once again anecdotes prove little (for example which areas of Mexico did you go to?). So do you deny that Mexico’s TFR is around 2.2-2.3 and that its GDP per capita is $15,312.

That’s nice, but then you aren’t paying for them, are you?

I am willing to pay taxes for it.

Pro-business doesn’t translate into pro fast food jobs only.

I agree but those in the state government of say Mississippi don’t realize this.

[aldiboronti]

The thing that strikes an Englishman is how is it that Red Staters and Blue Staters hate and despise each other so deeply, as evidently you do. Aren’t you part of the same country, honouring the same flag, the same Constitution? Can any nation hold together which is so deeply divided? Or am I mistaking the opinions of extremists for that of Joe Public?

[Bridget_Burke]

@aldiboronti

The thing that strikes an Englishman is how is it that Red Staters and Blue Staters hate and despise each other so deeply, as evidently you do. Aren’t you part of the same country, honouring the same flag, the same Constitution? Can any nation hold together which is so deeply divided? Or am I mistaking the opinions of extremists for that of Joe Public?

They are extremists. The Red State/Blue State dichotomy is only meaningful for the Electoral College. Page down here to find a truer map.

It’s a fact that Republican policies have not been good for many of our states. Texas is number one in the percentage of people lacking medical coverage. Our education funding is abysmal, although some young Texans still get good public school educations. Our employment figures aren’t bad–but no thanks to Rick Perry.

The best sources for finding out What’s Wrong with Texas & What We Can Do About It are sitesrun by Texas liberals. Some people in “The Blue States” assume that 100% of us here are raving racist throwbacks. We aren’t.

[Deegeea]

[QUOTE=BobLibDem ]

What social policies? Is it important to you that not everyone gets to marry the person he/she loves? Or do you hate the idea of people having sex and “getting away with it”? Or do you hate that whole freedom of religion thing? Are you looking for the North vs. South decision to be overturned?
[/QUOTE]

@ITR_champion

None of the above. All states have freedom of religion in major issues, though attacks against freedom of religion generally come from Democrats, so the red states would be preferable from that perspective. As for having sex, it’s legal in all fifty states as well. I think you’re just ranting and being silly, but if you’d like to explain what you’re talking bout I’ll be happy to listen.

In my opinion, Bob was mostly ranting and being silly, but the part where he wasn’t was the question left unanswered by ITR, “What social policies?” Meaning what social policies are more important than the fiscal ones disagreed with in an earlier mention? Then the humor attempt part came in as he speculated sarcastically about what they might be.

“Attacks against freedom of religion generally come from Democrats” is also a bit of being silly. There’s a general disagreement of where the line should be drawn when it comes to how the religious practice of one person affects another between the parties; both parties in general support freedom of religion.

[BrainGlutton]

@msmith537

If right-wing conservativism is so great, why do their states suck?

Not by accident.

[fluiddruid]

@curlcoat

How so what? That one cannot get Medicaid or food stamps or any of that unless one has children? You didn’t know that?

I didn’t know that. It turns out that I didn’t know that because it is wrong.

“Medicaid provides health coverage for some low-income people, families and children, pregnant women, the elderly, and people with disabilities. Medicaid programs must follow federal guidelines, but they vary somewhat from state to state.” (from: Heathcare.gov

Too vague? Okay, I’ll pick a state at random - where I live, Iowa:

“Iowa will expand its Medicaid program in 2014 to cover households with incomes up to 133% of the federal poverty level. That works out to about $15,800 a year for 1 person or $32,500 for a family of 4.”

As for food stamps, the SNAP page is down due to the government shutdown, but again is not merely limited to people with children:

'“SNAP eligibility rules require that participants be at or below 130% of the Federal Poverty Level. Recent studies show that 49% of all SNAP participants are children (age 18 or younger), with almost two-thirds of SNAP children living in single-parent households. In total, 76% of SNAP benefits go towards households with children, 16% go to households with disabled persons, and 9% go to households with senior citizens.” Snaptohealth.org

curlcoat, if you can’t master a ten second Google fact checking search when making strong factual assertions that support your political views, I doubt your experiences about Mexicans in your neighborhood is anything even remotely resembling relevant information.

[madmonk28]

@aldiboronti

The thing that strikes an Englishman is how is it that Red Staters and Blue Staters hate and despise each other so deeply, as evidently you do. Aren’t you part of the same country, honouring the same flag, the same Constitution?..

We’re not countrymen anymore. And won’t be again.

[BrainGlutton]

@madmonk28

We’re not countrymen anymore. And won’t be again.

We will, we will. And Her Majesty’s Court will be in New York where it belongs.

[curlcoat]

@Qin_Shi_Huangdi

I gave you some metrics in which Germany does better.

You listed things that you feel are better, but ignored my question as to what Germany may be giving up to pay for these programs.

I was uncertain as to the extent of this practice.

Well, it was also available to seniors and disabled, but since I was neither of those the only way I was going to get Medicaid back then was if I had a kid. And in those days, WA didn’t even have welfare so no food stamps.

And it means that everybody should at least have a minimum health care and food assistance.

Sure, why not? Lets also make sure we pay for their housing including utilities, clothing, child care and whatever else you think someone “deserves”.

Yes. To elaborate, it is the people who run the banks, and those running related financial operations that such as those investing in corporations that form the core of the ultra-wealthy in the United States who were greatly aided by the fact that the banks did not go under.

So were all of those worker bees who had accounts and loans with those banks, not to mention the employees.

Not really. If you have say $5,000,000 dollars in income, a few thousand dollars less in taxes is not really noticeable but if you have $25,000 it makes a big difference.

Its still a benefit available to parents only.

Once again anecdotes prove little (for example which areas of Mexico did you go to?). So do you deny that Mexico’s TFR is around 2.2-2.3 and that its GDP per capita is $15,312.

Mexico City, Tijuana, Mexicali, Puerto Vallarta, Mazatlan and most of the Baja. I have no idea if those stats are right or not, but they are pretty meaningless in that they are for the whole country - people living in cities that get tourists have a better quality of life than those elsewhere (which is most of the country). Plus, you have the very rich mostly concentrated in a few places - cut them out and your GDP drops.

I am willing to pay taxes for it.

Then do so. You’ll have to find out where to send it tho.

I agree but those in the state government of say Mississippi don’t realize this.

Now it’s Mississippi? What does that have to do with anything?

[curlcoat]

@fluiddruid

I didn’t know that. It turns out that I didn’t know that because it is wrong.

a) I was talking about when I was living below the poverty line.
b) Note that “some low-income people”. I’m not going to bother Googling around to see what that might mean, but I just had a friend refused MediCal because she isn’t a mother, disabled or a senior - otherwise her income status was plenty low enough.
c) What Iowa is going to do in 2014 with the advent of Obamacare is immaterial.
d) What Iowa’s SNAP eligibility rules are has zero to do with me back in the day in WA, however your own quote shows that an able bodied non-senior cannot get it.

I suggest you check your facts before saying mine are wrong.

[Qin_Shi_Huangdi]

@curlcoat

You listed things that you feel are better, but ignored my question as to what Germany may be giving up to pay for these programs.

If that is your question, then the answer is Germans give up virtually nothing. Most Germans have middle-class lives similar to the United States and billionaires have their billions, so modestly higher tax rates seem to have gotten them a robust safety net in exchange for more or less the same standard of living.

Well, it was also available to seniors and disabled, but since I was neither of those the only way I was going to get Medicaid back then was if I had a kid. And in those days, WA didn’t even have welfare so no food stamps.

In that case the situation is different from today.

Sure, why not? Lets also make sure we pay for their housing including utilities, clothing, child care and whatever else you think someone “deserves”.

In a country as wealthy at the United States, I believe everyone can be guaranteed at least a minimum standard of living so I say with full seriousness why not?

So were all of those worker bees who had accounts and loans with those banks, not to mention the employees.

Most people already had their bank accounts covered under FDIC.

Its still a benefit available to parents only.

So what? The effect is to benefit those with children the most. And if you want less foreign immigration, the best solution is to encourage the native birth-rate.

Mexico City, Tijuana, Mexicali, Puerto Vallarta, Mazatlan and most of the Baja. I have no idea if those stats are right or not, but they are pretty meaningless in that they are for the whole country - people living in cities that get tourists have a better quality of life than those elsewhere (which is most of the country). Plus, you have the very rich mostly concentrated in a few places - cut them out and your GDP drops.

That might be true for GDP (although a huge chunk of the Mexican population is middle-class), but it isn’t really true for the TFR despite asserting that your assertions of massive Mexican hordes.

Then do so. You’ll have to find out where to send it tho.

Yes, to the IRS.

Now it’s Mississippi? What does that have to do with anything?

I was just giving an example of states that try to attract low-wage businesses.

[Sahirrnee]

@aldiboronti

The thing that strikes an Englishman is how is it that Red Staters and Blue Staters hate and despise each other so deeply, as evidently you do. Aren’t you part of the same country, honouring the same flag, the same Constitution? Can any nation hold together which is so deeply divided? Or am I mistaking the opinions of extremists for that of Joe Public?

Haters gotta hate on something
and political affiliation isn’t a protected class.
Haters will always find some group to hate and since it isn’t PC/cool to hate blacks or Jews or Muslims or Arabs or Catholics, or gays, or the Irish. etc they have to create another group to hate and place blame on.
You can practically see the froth on their lips and the big purple vein throbbing in their foreheads as they post.

To those of us in the middle who aren’t hating on anybody, well to me they look like a smug bunch of hypocrites who are so busy pointing out the hate in others that they don’t see the hate within themselves. For some other people they are an noisy annoyance, for others they are a source of entertainment.

They think they are smart and clever and superior but they aren’t any different than any of the other haters through out history no matter how much they try to twist it.

Haters will always find somebody to hate and point their fingers at, they make a lot of noise but they don’t represent the majority.

[Hentor_the_Barbarian]

@sahirrnee

Haters gotta hate on something
and political affiliation isn’t a protected class.
Haters will always find some group to hate and since it isn’t PC/cool to hate blacks or Jews or Muslims or Arabs or Catholics, or gays, or the Irish. etc they have to create another group to hate and place blame on.
You can practically see the froth on their lips and the big purple vein throbbing in their foreheads as they post.

To those of us in the middle who aren’t hating on anybody, well to me they look like a smug bunch of hypocrites who are so busy pointing out the hate in others that they don’t see the hate within themselves. For some other people they are an noisy annoyance, for others they are a source of entertainment.

They think they are smart and clever and superior but they aren’t any different than any of the other haters through out history no matter how much they try to twist it.

Haters will always find somebody to hate and point their fingers at, they make a lot of noise but they don’t represent the majority.

You’re absolutely right! Placing people into a poorly defined category and then completely dismissing everyone in that category, as well as any points they might make, is a completely unacceptable way to consider complex issues.