- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Political Ideology Based on Resources ?
Posted on 7/12/18 at 7:29 pm to volod
Posted on 7/12/18 at 7:29 pm to volod
One of the basic environmental economics tenants is that when you're poor, you generally don't give a shite about the environment. As you gain wealth, you place a greater value on the condition of your surroundings. You don't spend years saving money to buy a big house on a lake filled with trash and pollutants.
The rich side of the liberal spectrum subscribes to that philosophy, and applies it to many things. You can argue their success, but that's the core idea.
The rich side of the liberal spectrum subscribes to that philosophy, and applies it to many things. You can argue their success, but that's the core idea.
0
Posted on 7/12/18 at 7:30 pm to volod
You may be onto something, but it needs refining
Posted on 7/12/18 at 7:34 pm to volod
People are just wired differently, they'll never understand each other but flock to those with similar mindsets
It's time people realize this.
It's time people realize this.
Posted on 7/12/18 at 8:54 pm to thebigmuffaletta
quote:
The poorest areas in the south vote democrat.
Most southern are deeply red since they have more rural areas. It is only the larger cities that usually vote democratic.
Those cities do not represent the majority demographic of the states (take Louisiana as an example). By your logic, Baton Rouge and New Orleans are the poorest regions.
We both that is not true. They just have a large number of poor people. But most of the rural areas in the state are lower middle with some upper middle. Dont believe me, look up wage distribution.
To be fair, in National level elections what you say is apparent. However, we are talking about whites in the entire as a whole.
Posted on 7/12/18 at 9:13 pm to llfshoals
quote:
if you noticed, much of the manufacturing is moving to the red states.
Detroit had an abundance of housing, although today much of it has simply been bulldozed down because people fled the city.
The weight of the useless grew too great for the few to carry.
I agree that a disproportionate amount of poor people who are not able to independently take care of themselves (i use this term as it applies to the unwillingly and the working poor) will be a burden that can not be overcome.
Deregulation is a good thing when done with the appropriate industries. Like anything, it can be abused if not done tactically.
quote:
The South is not so poor you see, as for one thing, it costs less to live here. I would argue the people of the south are far more caring than liberals can understand.
My biggest issue with Southern states is that many of them refuse to diversify their economy. I know it gets annoying, but there is a reason companies overlook states like LA for TX. Granted, personal responsibility is also a factor when looking for employment. But everyone cant just is a nurse or a teacher (nothing wrong those professions, just making a point).
quote:
Why? Because if you look at what people contribute voluntarily, to causes and charities as individuals the percentages are far higher for conservatives.
Liberals are very willing to throw other people’s money at problems. But their time? Their money?
Not so much.
I also contributed to charities that kept the donations private. I am not sure which party usually donates more. I think it is a battle of which side do you prefer: private donations or government-sponsored programs.
It ties in with the mentality, conservatives prefer private because a) direct access to the person/ problem b)just enough to help, but finding a job is still important.
whereas liberals believe a) government can sustain help longer (ie our tax dollars) b) government can provide necessities (housing, etc)
Not advocating the liberal side, just stating it.
Posted on 7/12/18 at 9:20 pm to volod
Been meaning to read this book
quote:
Yankeedom: Founded by Puritans, residents in Northeastern states and the industrial Midwest tend to be more comfortable with government regulation. They value education and the common good more than other regions. New Netherland: The Netherlands was the most sophisticated society in the Western world when New York was founded, Woodard writes, so it’s no wonder that the region has been a hub of global commerce. It’s also the region most accepting of historically persecuted populations.
quote:
The Midlands: Stretching from Quaker territory west through Iowa and into more populated areas of the Midwest, the Midlands are “pluralistic and organized around the middle class.” Government intrusion is unwelcome, and ethnic and ideological purity isn’t a priority. Tidewater: The coastal regions in the English colonies of Virginia, North Carolina, Maryland and Delaware tend to respect authority and value tradition. Once the most powerful American nation, it began to decline during Westward expansion. Greater Appalachia: Extending from West Virginia through the Great Smoky Mountains and into Northwest Texas, the descendants of Irish, English and Scottish settlers value individual liberty. Residents are “intensely suspicious of lowland aristocrats and Yankee social engineers.”
quote:
eep South: Dixie still traces its roots to the caste system established by masters who tried to duplicate West Indies-style slave society, Woodard writes. The Old South values states’ rights and local control and fights the expansion of federal powers. El Norte: Southwest Texas and the border region is the oldest, and most linguistically different, nation in the Americas. Hard work and self-sufficiency are prized values. The Left Coast: A hybrid, Woodard says, of Appalachian independence and Yankee utopianism loosely defined by the Pacific Ocean on one side and coastal mountain ranges like the Cascades and the Sierra Nevadas on the other. The independence and innovation required of early explorers continues to manifest in places like Silicon Valley and the tech companies around Seattle. The Far West: The Great Plains and the Mountain West were built by industry, made necessary by harsh, sometimes inhospitable climates. Far Westerners are intensely libertarian and deeply distrustful of big institutions, whether they are railroads and monopolies or the federal government. New France: Former French colonies in and around New Orleans and Quebec tend toward consensus and egalitarian, “among the most liberal on the continent, with unusually tolerant attitudes toward gays and people of all races and a ready acceptance of government involvement in the economy,” Woodard writes. First Nation: The few First Nation peoples left — Native Americans who never gave up their land to white settlers — are mainly in the harshly Arctic north of Canada and Alaska. They have sovereignty over their lands, but their population is only around 300,000.
Posted on 7/12/18 at 9:31 pm to volod
I don’t mean to be a jerk, but economic determinism is junk. If you look at the data, you’ll see people doing the opposite of what economics would predict.
Politics especially on this scale, is cultural.
Why is the south so opposed to welfare? We’re the children of English landowners, and British hill people. They believed in self reliance, not dependence.
Let me add a caveat though, and actually agree with you. Resources, over the long haul, can shape culture, and in turn behavior.
Middle Eastern culture generally view problems as zero sum. They believe every conflict will have a winner and loser. They don’t believe in win win scenarios, where both sides profit. This is probably the result of resource scarcity, and how it shaped the native cultures over the centuries.
Politics especially on this scale, is cultural.
Why is the south so opposed to welfare? We’re the children of English landowners, and British hill people. They believed in self reliance, not dependence.
Let me add a caveat though, and actually agree with you. Resources, over the long haul, can shape culture, and in turn behavior.
Middle Eastern culture generally view problems as zero sum. They believe every conflict will have a winner and loser. They don’t believe in win win scenarios, where both sides profit. This is probably the result of resource scarcity, and how it shaped the native cultures over the centuries.
This post was edited on 7/12/18 at 9:40 pm
Posted on 7/12/18 at 9:35 pm to roadGator
quote:
We care. We also want people to care about themselves first.
I think conservatives are often more caring, especially in their personal lives.
We just don’t support welfare programs that encourage bad choices.
Posted on 7/12/18 at 9:55 pm to Lima Whiskey
As I thought about the OP over the last few hours, my mind kept drifting to Thomas Sowell’s book “Black Reednecks and White Liberals.”. It has been several years, but I seem to remember a thesis that different North American regions were settled from distinct regions in the British Isles and that the behaviors and ideology of a given American region can be traced back to the behavior and ideologies of those British regions.
I wonder whether that may carry-over into the questions raised by the OP. My kids have worn me out too much today to spend a lot more time thinking about it tonight.
I wonder whether that may carry-over into the questions raised by the OP. My kids have worn me out too much today to spend a lot more time thinking about it tonight.
This post was edited on 7/12/18 at 9:57 pm
Posted on 7/12/18 at 10:01 pm to AggieHank86
A couple of people have written about that. Ablions Seed and Joel Garreau’s Nine Nations both argue the point, for example.
I largely buy it.
Massachusetts still feels very Puritan to me, and I think it does a neat job of explaining their preference for authoritarian states, and how they routinely put the community before the individual.
Cultures also changes at a glacial pace, so it makes sense that the values that the settlers brought would linger.
Unfortunately, north-south immigration has changed much of the south. We are losing what we were.
I largely buy it.
Massachusetts still feels very Puritan to me, and I think it does a neat job of explaining their preference for authoritarian states, and how they routinely put the community before the individual.
Cultures also changes at a glacial pace, so it makes sense that the values that the settlers brought would linger.
Unfortunately, north-south immigration has changed much of the south. We are losing what we were.
This post was edited on 7/13/18 at 12:35 am
Posted on 7/12/18 at 10:53 pm to volod
quote:
The south has a larger percentage of poverty across demographics. With that many people taking welfare, more money from the working classes is needed. And since the upper class have tax break loopholes, the middle class pays.
This is kinda a chicken or the egg argument.
Posted on 7/12/18 at 10:55 pm to volod
quote:Sorta. They see the wreckage the “war on poverty” as wrought.
The reason people in the South push conservatism is partly due to a lack of economic empowerment. The south has a larger percentage of poverty across demographics. With that many people taking welfare, more money from the working classes is needed.
quote:.
And since the upper class have tax break loopholes, the middle class pays
Nope. The middle class doesn’t pay isht. Yet. But it’s coming. This post was edited on 7/12/18 at 10:56 pm
Posted on 7/12/18 at 10:58 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
My first thought is that my Texas seems to be the exception to your thesis.
Except for Austin, which actually proves the OP correct.
Posted on 7/12/18 at 11:37 pm to volod
Just two quick examples of why I don't think resources have nearly as much to do w/ prosperity as I once did; Hong Kong and Venezuela. I know, out of the country, but Hong Kong is basically a bunch of rocks w/ some trees on it, barely any resources except a harbor, yet they are very prosperous.
We all know Venezuela's situation, but they are loaded w/ natural resources.
There are probably a ton of factors that go into something like this, but it seems like culture is the biggest culprit.
We all know Venezuela's situation, but they are loaded w/ natural resources.
There are probably a ton of factors that go into something like this, but it seems like culture is the biggest culprit.
Posted on 7/13/18 at 12:22 am to volod
The reasons Northerners are more liberal is because the founders of the north were puritans. They supported more representation. The south was full of cavaliers who supported the English monarch. They were more traditional as well in religion, and they believed in an aristocracy and in class roles, which was very different from the puritans, and more like other Europeans
Posted on 7/13/18 at 12:26 am to volod
To the politically uninformed it is usually based on how they were raised.
Example
1. Republicans are racist and only out to protect the rich
2. Democrats are baby killers and think Christians are ignorant
3. Republicans only want to lower taxes to help the rich
4. Democrats want to raise taxes to help minorities who are trying to take over our country
I believe that the states have lost to much power. It has nothing to do with party affiliation. It has to do with local and state politicians taking handouts from the federal government. The handouts overtime has caused the states to be dependent on the federal government for almost everything.
It’s both blue state and a red state problem. States are just like people on welfare who can work but would rather just draw a check.
Most voters vote down party lines and not the people who can actually make a difference. This happens in inner city, rural area’s, blue states, and red states.
Political ideology is the problem. If voters would just vote for the people who could make a good change and not down party lines government would work better federally and at the state level.
Example
1. Republicans are racist and only out to protect the rich
2. Democrats are baby killers and think Christians are ignorant
3. Republicans only want to lower taxes to help the rich
4. Democrats want to raise taxes to help minorities who are trying to take over our country
I believe that the states have lost to much power. It has nothing to do with party affiliation. It has to do with local and state politicians taking handouts from the federal government. The handouts overtime has caused the states to be dependent on the federal government for almost everything.
It’s both blue state and a red state problem. States are just like people on welfare who can work but would rather just draw a check.
Most voters vote down party lines and not the people who can actually make a difference. This happens in inner city, rural area’s, blue states, and red states.
Political ideology is the problem. If voters would just vote for the people who could make a good change and not down party lines government would work better federally and at the state level.
This post was edited on 7/13/18 at 12:28 am
Posted on 7/13/18 at 12:37 am to MizzouBS
quote:
Political ideology is the problem. If voters would just vote for the people who could make a good change and not down party lines government would work better federally and at the state level.
That’s a fantasy.
Posted on 7/13/18 at 12:39 am to stuntman
quote:
We all know Venezuela's situation, but they are loaded w/ natural resources.
Instant and easy wealth is almost always a disaster. Norway is one of the few countries to escape the resource curse, but that only reinforces your point about culture.
Posted on 7/13/18 at 12:40 am to volod
Detroit
/mic drop
/mic drop
Posted on 7/13/18 at 1:02 am to Lima Whiskey
That’s the same thing most people said about Trump winning the election both republican and democrats.
It’s not a fantasy if the uniformed voters actually vote for the right person. If they don’t know anything about the person or policies don’t vote on that particular race.
I live in the 7th congressional district in Missouri. We have probably the worst congressman(Billy Long) in congress. He flunked out of college, got his auctioneer license and became a salesman and now he is a professional gambler. Gambling is his first job and being in congress is his 2nd job.
He has a group of friends called “metro mafia”. They bring in out of state strippers, escorts, black out the windows, gamble, and pay for sex.
He still wins his seat because the 7th district is a extremely red district. People are so uninformed he doesn’t even have to campaign.
It’s not a fantasy Trump is president
It’s not a fantasy if the uniformed voters actually vote for the right person. If they don’t know anything about the person or policies don’t vote on that particular race.
I live in the 7th congressional district in Missouri. We have probably the worst congressman(Billy Long) in congress. He flunked out of college, got his auctioneer license and became a salesman and now he is a professional gambler. Gambling is his first job and being in congress is his 2nd job.
He has a group of friends called “metro mafia”. They bring in out of state strippers, escorts, black out the windows, gamble, and pay for sex.
He still wins his seat because the 7th district is a extremely red district. People are so uninformed he doesn’t even have to campaign.
It’s not a fantasy Trump is president
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News