A funny thing about "worst cities" lists: They ALL have ONE THING in Common!

page: 5
29
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 25 2013 @ 08:04 PM
link   
Uhm maybe poor people vote democrats more often? Wow im a genious




posted on Feb, 25 2013 @ 08:53 PM
link   
Michigan has not been "raped by republicans" we were just all blown away ( right out of the state) by Granholm. Ask yourself where do all these crazy governing ideas come from? Liberal universities!
They taught the economics of shipping jobs overseas, you know global redistribution.



posted on Feb, 25 2013 @ 08:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by sheepslayer247
I think this is what you call a false equivalency.

If we follow the same line of thinking, what does it say about Republicans when we hear that the the biggest welfare states in the country are Red states?

The game can be played both ways and in the end it serves no real purpose to solve real problems.


Haha right on except people are trained to support their team and bleed red or blue depending on their party.. not necessarily to solve any real problems.



posted on Feb, 25 2013 @ 09:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by NoJoker13
reply to post by Aazadan
 


So then you agree with sheep that this thread is absolutely pointless... correct?


Yes.



posted on Feb, 25 2013 @ 09:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by ollncasino

Left wingers think if they throw OTHER PEOPLES' money at a problem, that will fix it.


Those of us who are left wing, but not democrats, would take offense at that comment.

The democrats are no more left-wing than the republicans.

Left wingers are liberal but, Liberalism is not left wing.

The democrats are right wing by the true definition of left and right. American politics uses left and right to divide you, with both sides maintaining the establishment and capitalist economy.

Left wingers traditionally are anti-state, anti-establishment, and want change in government and economy. The extreme left being anarchism, no state at all.

There is NO left-wing in American politix.

edit on 2/25/2013 by ANOK because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 25 2013 @ 09:43 PM
link   
OP, have you ever thought that maybe they vote democrat because they're poor, not that they are poor because they vote democrat?




posted on Feb, 25 2013 @ 10:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by NoJoker13
reply to post by groingrinder
 


Although I absolutely agree with you, a political class system gets us no where, that was not the OPS intention.


A class system is exactly what we have now. And the working class is not represented. Neither are the poor and the sick or the old and disabled.



posted on Feb, 25 2013 @ 11:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by groingrinder

Originally posted by sheepslayer247
I think this is what you call a false equivalency.

If we follow the same line of thinking, what does it say about Republicans when we hear that the the biggest welfare states in the country are Red states?

The game can be played both ways and in the end it serves no real purpose to solve real problems.


It says we need to get rid of REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS. Just getting rid of one or the other is not going to fix the problem.


I have no problem with taking false "party" affiliations out of the equation. The problem is, as people with simialr views unite, SOMEONE ELSE will give them a name, and a "Party" identity.
Look at what's happened to "Tea Party Activists." There was never a call to organize a "Tea Party" political party; it ws a creation of media and others looking for a way to pigeon-hole anti-tax, small-government activists.

There was a time when local elections were NON partisan. People ran as coalitions ("The Good Government League," "Citizens Organized for Public Service") rather than as partisans looking for stepping-stones to higher office. Some cities still abide by this tradition, and are probably better-off for it.

jw



posted on Feb, 25 2013 @ 11:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by tabov
So let me get this straight.. OP and several other party fellows are trying to link and blame current bad conditions in cities all over america to the democrats last ruling them..

some people are really simplistic.. you are trying to make a simple correlation link because your simple minds can't cope with the fact that there are A HUGE number of factors involved in the problem..


I've laid no blame, anywhere. I've noted a commonality among cities judged on criteria of crime, et c.

If this thread were a Rorshach test, then it has revealed the simplistic views of others' reflexively defensive insecurity. Sniping based solely upon bare assumptions and prejudices destroys the sniper's aim as well as her credibility.

I've never voted a "straight ticket" in my life. Some of my best political friends are elected Democrats, and others are Republican, Independent, and even apartisan. Mayor Castro's mom once served me breakfast at a gathering. I've had drinks with Ann Richards, and lunch with John Cornyn (at different times). I'm not a dyed-in the-wool anything, party-wise.

I tend to believe that liberals are better at the local level, but conservatives better nationally.

All of the silly, unfounded attacks are both amusing and revealing. Unfortunately, the most vociferous had in reality nothing of substance to say.

jw



posted on Feb, 26 2013 @ 12:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by ANOK
OP, have you ever thought that maybe they vote democrat because they're poor, not that they are poor because they vote democrat?


I never made any cause/effect statement. Your assumptions betray your prejudice.
Read my other posts in this thread.

I've voted for as many Democrats as Republicans in my life. I even campaigned for Max Nofziger (search his name), a non-partisan outsider who turned Austin politics upside-down. They were some of the best times I ever had, politically. And Austin is better for it.

Too many people are afraid to look at themselves or their surroundings critically. They operate from a base that they blindly and falsely perceive to be "correct" or "superior."

Some of you need to grow up.

jw



posted on Feb, 26 2013 @ 03:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by jdub297
I never made any cause/effect statement. Your assumptions betray your prejudice.
Read my other posts in this thread.


I never said you did, but the thing in common you were pointing out is that they vote democrat, no?

Sorry if I'm wrong but that is what I got from it.

What prejudice?



posted on Feb, 26 2013 @ 04:22 AM
link   
The reason most conservatives are found in the older age-groups is because theyve been around long enough to see the fruits of leftism. Any city or country you go to in the world where liberalism, "democracy", socialism and communism rules you will,in due time, see decay,soaring murder rates, genocidal dictators,people who have become docile because of welfare-and-government-dependence, high crime, racial tensions, high taxes, low life expectancy, illness, death...all the usual indicators of leftism.The information in your OP is nothing new to conservatives.

Right-Left represents the classic battle between light and darkness. For the conservative mind there is"right and wrong". This is why the right tends to be more religious while the left tends to be more secular and atheistic. For the left there is no clear-cut "right/wrong". Its a philosophy of life that is completely alien to the right. So the horrific conditions you speak of are not at all "horrific" to leftists. People living in utter squalor and despair in a third-world country is, to the leftists eye "a fascinating and exotic foreign culture we can learn from". They`ll visit an ayahuasca shaman in the Amazonian Rainforest, sit in the mud among snakes,do drugs, vomit and pass out and call it a "spiritual experience".

Leftism is rule of the mob, rule of the dumb and uneducated. Rightism is rule by merit, rule of the rich and successful.Go figure why their cities in South America, Africa, Russia, China, are cesspool swamps of dirt and madness.



posted on Feb, 26 2013 @ 04:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by ANOK
OP, have you ever thought that maybe they vote democrat because they're poor, not that they are poor because they vote democrat?


Its a vicious cycle. Democrats/Handouts lead to poverty, poverty leads to voting for Democracts/Handouts. Because the collectives of such cities are in their collective-hive-minded-rut the only possibility is for an individual to wake up and leave their decaying/leftist part of town and rise to another social class on their own.. Of course collectivists/leftists dont take well to individualists who rise up to success so its in their best interest to leave that part of town lest they get gunned down by the envious "equality" mob.



posted on Feb, 26 2013 @ 05:21 AM
link   
reply to post by lucid eyes
 


I really wish you wouldn't use terms like 'leftist' because it has nothing to do with being left-wing.

Communities fall into poverty due to lack of work, because capitalists remove their contribution to the economy when they can't make enough profit. Lack of work, opportunities, and education is the vicious cycle.

With or without hand-outs those same people would still be poor. Blaming it on handouts is like blaming food for starvation.

Give people the means to produce, and you wouldn't have to give them anything, but I'm pretty sure you don't support worker ownership? Capitalism took away the opportunity when it denied the 'commoners' the right to use land in the 1700's.

Making left-wing, right-wing arguments is not going to solve anything. All you are doing is trying to find something to blame it on, that doesn't make you question what you've decided to believe, but you offer no real solutions.

edit on 2/26/2013 by ANOK because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 26 2013 @ 07:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by ANOK

Communities fall into poverty due to lack of work, because capitalists remove their contribution to the economy when they can't make enough profit. Lack of work, opportunities, and education is the vicious cycle.


All leftists truly talk like this. You think that those who provide the most employment worldwide (capitalists) are to blame for lack of work. Because leftists drive away capitalism, their cities and countries fall into poverty.



With or without hand-outs those same people would still be poor. Blaming it on handouts is like blaming food for starvation.


Excessive handouts demean and immobilize the receiver and are the quickest path to poverty.



Making left-wing, right-wing arguments is not going to solve anything.


It will. It gives people the choice of whether to live in a free-market economy or a socialist state, the choice of whether to be free or not.



All you are doing is trying to find something to blame it on, that doesn't make you question what you've decided to believe, but you offer no real solutions.


Like you blaming poverty on capitalism? Poverty is caused mostly by internalized hopelessness, not by successful people.

The way you talk I am pretty sure you dont live in a socialist paradise such as Venezuela, Cuba, Zimabwe, North Korea, where resources are scarce and people are forever blaming other countries and "capitalists".

You probably live in a free-market economy, smug and comfortable,, criticizing the hand that feeds you, while using a computer and internet (both products of capitalism), having a soft drink (product of capitalism), dressed in jeans(product of capitalism) etc.



posted on Feb, 26 2013 @ 08:03 AM
link   
worst poverty states....gee....most of them are run by republicans...
THE ONE THING IN COMMON!!!
en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Feb, 26 2013 @ 08:05 AM
link   
reply to post by groingrinder
 


That was my point, that the class system does nothing for us, but the OP is making this a Red and Blue debate.
edit on 26-2-2013 by NoJoker13 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 26 2013 @ 08:08 AM
link   
Reply to post by jdub297
 


It doesn't matter if you are right winged or left winged. Both sides are worthless. What society needs to do is take a new position and that is ABOVE the damn wings.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Feb, 26 2013 @ 09:02 PM
link   
reply to post by ANOK
 



Communities fall into poverty due to lack of work, because capitalists remove their contribution to the economy when they can't make enough profit. Lack of work, opportunities, and education is the vicious cycle.


I don't think so. Some of the most industrial capitalists I ever met were Mexican immigrants, who had noone to rely upon but themselves (instead of government handouts). My former father-in-law came here as a kid (teenager) and learned to shine shoes at the train station. He gradually bought hand tools, and became a skilled carpenter, and home-builder. He did it from literally NOTHING, and did it on his own. As for education, he quit school in Mexico in 3rd grade and came here knowing little English. His daughter (my ex) didn't speak English until she started school. She is an independent woman, with her own ranchero and a good (not wealthy) life, and never went beyond high school education-wise.

Another friend of my family rented an out-building on a corner of their property and opened a little store that sold basic sundries. After about 5 years, he bought the corner from them, built a bigger building and his little store became "XXXXX Market." His kids and grandkids run it today.

There are dozens of these stories from my own neighborhoo and childhood. There's no reason this type of capitalism can't exist in any city that has low crime, decent services and reasonable taxes.
Bottom line: when you rely on your own skills and abilities and desires, you do not need the government to create "opportunities."



posted on Feb, 26 2013 @ 09:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by NoJoker13
reply to post by groingrinder
 


... the OP is making this a Red and Blue debate.
edit on 26-2-2013 by NoJoker13 because: (no reason given)


No, small-minded posters have done that.
I only posted an observation, without any conclusions.

Despite all the sniping, no one has yet said that the facts or criteria I used were not accurate.
I didn't create the "source" lists; I culled from them the cities OTHERS have deemed "worst."





top topics
 
29
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join