It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Red state, blue state divide reflected in grim statistic: fatal traffic accidents

page: 4
7
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 10:06 AM
link   
reply to post by sirhumperdink
 


Maybe.

I work with the public and IT and I was once very excited about how access to all the information in the world in real-time would reshape society.

Then I realized that 90% of those people will just update Facebook and look for porn.

The majority has always been clueless and is currently clueless and still will be, as far as I can tell, remarkably clueless in the future. A terminal open to the world is only as useful as the user wants it to be. Most just want Facebook and porn.

Even in my small town where any news is huge news and gets plastered over the TV and all the papers for weeks at a time I still encounter a frighteningly high number of people who have no clue that anything ever happened.

Give them facts and figures and their eyes gloss over. Give them a catchy name like "Patriot Act" and they mindlessly support it on nothing more substantial than it sounding like a good thing.

I seriously doubt that will ever change.




posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 10:10 AM
link   
reply to post by 11235813213455
 


And why is this?

Or have you simply run out of things to say?



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 10:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
reply to post by sirhumperdink
 


Maybe.

I work with the public and IT and I was once very excited about how access to all the information in the world in real-time would reshape society.

Then I realized that 90% of those people will just update Facebook and look for porn.

The majority has always been clueless and is currently clueless and still will be, as far as I can tell, remarkably clueless in the future. A terminal open to the world is only as useful as the user wants it to be. Most just want Facebook and porn.

Even in my small town where any news is huge news and gets plastered over the TV and all the papers for weeks at a time I still encounter a frighteningly high number of people who have no clue that anything ever happened.

Give them facts and figures and their eyes gloss over. Give them a catchy name like "Patriot Act" and they mindlessly support it on nothing more substantial than it sounding like a good thing.

I seriously doubt that will ever change.

but it is changing there is a huge disparity in knowledge for sure but i dont think anyone here could make the case that the average person today is less knowledgeable now than they were 100 years ago

the reason it looks so bad is because of the ease of access to information ...so those that actively seek it will acquire exponentially more than those who find it in passing



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 10:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by sirhumperdink

the reason it looks so bad is because of the ease of access to information ...so those that actively seek it will acquire exponentially more than those who find it in passing


So how do we foster an intrinsic desire for knowledge among the majority to encourage more to seek it out?

Seems people are either interested or they are not. I used to think anyone could be made interested once a topic affected them personally but have since been proven wrong on that assumption having seen plenty of people suffer directly from policies enacted only to continue remaining ignorant.



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 10:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere

Originally posted by sirhumperdink

the reason it looks so bad is because of the ease of access to information ...so those that actively seek it will acquire exponentially more than those who find it in passing


So how do we foster an intrinsic desire for knowledge among the majority to encourage more to seek it out?

Seems people are either interested or they are not. I used to think anyone could be made interested once a topic affected them personally but have since been proven wrong on that assumption having seen plenty of people suffer directly from policies enacted only to continue remaining ignorant.


intrinsic desire for knowledge is a human trait
think of small children.... why?.....why?.....why?
and it is generally beaten out of them as children literally or figuratively
all you have to do is nurture it
adults are an entirely different problem ...thought patterns are hard to break once they are set but essentially i you have to convince people that not knowing is not a weakness... the real weakness is being too scared to ask questions and learn you have to get rid of this idea that intelligence and knowledge is uncool or for the "elite"
.....there are a lot of psychological problems to deal with in adults but the real focus should be on children because the bigger changes as they have always been will be generational
edit on 20-11-2012 by sirhumperdink because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 10:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Erongaricuaro

Originally posted by nixie_nox
Because conservatives are only concerned about themselves and their cronies, while liberals are more concerned about others, and that translates to attitudes on the roads.


I may be inclined to give that some validity. Maybe it is the connection I was seeking. Red-staters do rather like their brewskis and one more for the road perhaps.


Over the last year in Texas I've seen more people drink n drive than I have my entire 20 years in Massachusetts.

I was going to blame it on most red states have no harsh winters so no one has to learn how to drive in the snow



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 11:51 AM
link   
reply to post by Erongaricuaro
 


As one poster pointed out, "red states" are typically more rural than blue.

Ever been driving the speed limit and have a family of deer run out onto the road in front of you? Not much to be done about that, and the deer definitely don't care about your politics.

Ever hit a patch of black ice in the middle of nowhere and go careening off the road into a ditch or down a steep embankment into a river? Not much to be done about that, and that ice doesn't give a hoot about your politics either.

Ever been driving during a really nasty storm, and all you want to do is get home, and you are just hoping there isn't a tornado nearby or that the hail pounding your windshield doesn't shatter it?

Point being, there are lots of reasons besides politics that figure into the results of such a "study", and equating causality to correlation is not a valid way of interpreting the results, either.

Say, has anyone done a study on the proportion of population using welfare services, comparing blue vs. red states? We are inferring from the results of this fatal driving accident study that red state people are reckless, ignorant, dangerous and stupid people, so why not consider the study I propose and let it imply what it will?



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 11:57 AM
link   
Red states; bigger highways, hiigher speed limits, & Better visibility which makes for more fun..oops I mean reckless behavior.



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 12:01 PM
link   
reply to post by khimbar
 


And I agree that nothing is simple. LOL



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 12:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by louczar
reply to post by Erongaricuaro
 


As one poster pointed out, "red states" are typically more rural than blue.

Ever been driving the speed limit and have a family of deer run out onto the road in front of you? Not much to be done about that, and the deer definitely don't care about your politics.

Ever hit a patch of black ice in the middle of nowhere and go careening off the road into a ditch or down a steep embankment into a river? Not much to be done about that, and that ice doesn't give a hoot about your politics either.

Ever been driving during a really nasty storm, and all you want to do is get home, and you are just hoping there isn't a tornado nearby or that the hail pounding your windshield doesn't shatter it?

Point being, there are lots of reasons besides politics that figure into the results of such a "study", and equating causality to correlation is not a valid way of interpreting the results, either.

Say, has anyone done a study on the proportion of population using welfare services, comparing blue vs. red states? We are inferring from the results of this fatal driving accident study that red state people are reckless, ignorant, dangerous and stupid people, so why not consider the study I propose and let it imply what it will?


Let's not assume Oregon, California, and Minnesota along with the other blue states are wall-to-wall city and urban sprawl. I imagine Michigan gets its share of black ice, as does Californai even. It is not always beach weather there. What you suggest factors in but it is not really a substantial enough argument to skew it in total.



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 12:05 PM
link   
reply to post by homeskillet
 


Pennsylvania would be a good state to look at. Still is majority wilderness, compared to some, and the highest mileage of roads of any state in teh union.



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 12:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Erongaricuaro
 


So do you think the rural populations of the blue states you just cited all vote democratic just because the majority of the state votes that way? Do you really believe that the rural populations of those blue states with similar inclement weather compose the majority of the voting power of these states? I believe it is the metro areas that account for the majority of democratic voting in those states, and my guess about this matter is just as good as yours.



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 12:44 PM
link   
I go back and forth between Texas and L.A.

There is a massive difference on how people drive in the two places.

People in Texas seem to have no concept of speed and space when driving at high speeds.

It is not uncommon to be behind 8 cars that take up the length that would normally contain

only 4 cars in Los Angeles.There is also the acceleration aspect in that Texans are always

accelerating, while Angelinos usually coast once they get behind someone.

There are probably 50Xs more cars on the 101 in L.A - yet the MOPAC in Austin seems more chaotic

and perilous.

Now, people in New Orleans are HORRIBLE drivers, the whole state in fact. I think it is just a

slower state of mind and comprehension.

As crazy as it sounds, L.A is much more orderly and conscious.

You have to be, or you will die from high blood pressure and or road rage.



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 12:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by louczar
reply to post by Erongaricuaro
 


So do you think the rural populations of the blue states you just cited all vote democratic just because the majority of the state votes that way? Do you really believe that the rural populations of those blue states with similar inclement weather compose the majority of the voting power of these states? I believe it is the metro areas that account for the majority of democratic voting in those states, and my guess about this matter is just as good as yours.


No, I'm sure those dynamic urban centers of Vermont hold political sway over their rural domains. Red state of Kansas cannot possibly have the politically liberal dominion and pull of the blue urban dynamo of Maine over its rural populace, no doubt.


edit on 20-11-2012 by Erongaricuaro because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 12:49 PM
link   
As someone who grew up in Minnesota, and have lived in Texas, Arizona, Colorado and Wyoming - I have noticed that drivers in red states tend to be more aggressive. In Texas, the DFW area, you will consistently see tire marks prior to exits, where people have driven their vehicle across the median, onto a frontage road, to avoid a traffic jam on the interstate. I also noticed in both Texas and Arizona that drivers tend to be incredibly inconsiderate, and the "right of way" goes to the individual with the bigger vehicle.



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 01:19 PM
link   
This isn't so much about Red vs Blue as much as Rural vs Urban. People in Rural areas are more likely to drink and drive, the speed limits are higher, and it takes longer for an ambulance to get to people to save their lives.



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 01:21 PM
link   
reply to post by louczar
 


On my phone so in sum - you nailed it.

Add to the rural issues the fact that EMS response times are 45 minutes out where I live.

You have no 10 min drive to a hospital. It's more like an hour if that good.

A life flight might take 20 - 30 minutes unlike the cities 3.

Even a life and death EMS or LEO response can take soong the victims bleed out way before even a first responder can get here. There are no paramedics only EMTs and most are vole feet firemen.



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 02:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Erongaricuaro
 


Ok, well blue states are only blue because of the large cities and the population of said cities. Those people take the bus, subway, walk, etc... Red states are far more rural, with much more open space to drive vehicles, even in the much smaller cities.



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 04:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Erongaricuaro
 


you mean red states, the home of bud light, nascar racing and rednecks.

i see no correlation at all. on a serious note, people died.



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 04:11 PM
link   
OH COME ON. :shk:
How people drive has NOTHING to do with how they vote. That's absurd beyond belief.

I've lived in many different parts of this country. The worst drivers I've encountered are in Delaware and DC .. both BLUE politically. The most polite drivers I've encountered were in Boston ... again, BLUE politically. Each region has a style of driving ... and it isn't connected with politics.

Unfreak'n believable!!



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join