bostonbubble.com

mpr · Joined: 06 Jun 2009 Posts: 344

Here are the states for how much each state sends or gets from the feds.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/8229012/Tax-Donor-or-Contrib-States

and divorce rates

http://www.statemaster.com/graph/lif_div_rat-lifestyle-divorce-rate

john p · Joined: 10 Mar 2006 Posts: 1820

Wow Kadrian..... that cartoon show has a character of a mentally disabled girl claiming to be the daughter of the former governor of Alaska and you think this is ok?

Wow, just wow...

In this Country there is an unspoken rule of decency that children are off limits in politics (that is unless you are religious and come from a poor area that the elites approve as being a fair target i.e. Revere, or Alaska). It doesn't matter how they portray them on the cartoon, "strong and assertive" b.s. you just don't go there. This cartoon did this for ratings and it was popular to trash Sarah Palin so that is exactly what they did, it isn't funny to portray a "strong and assertive" person with special needs, they used the person with special needs as a fucking punch line; it is indefensible and only a complete hatchet goon would step forward to defend this. Sarah Palin gets zero decency. She is religious and worst of all a commoner so she is a lightning rod of liberal anger. Liberals believe in elites, they solve problems by creating "Czars" as if one person can solve complex issues. Kind of like how Obama sent a Nobel Peace Prize winner to help plug the oil leak (and the person's Prize had nothing to do with this type of engineering). They expect commoners to sit passive and they ridicule them if they step forward, kind of like the way England treated us when we were a colony. So, we had to beat the shit out them. Citizens give up their rights when they let others tell them that they are dumb hicks and to just shut up and follow along. They hate Palin because she was a commoner and she wouldn't just sit there and keep her mouth shut like a good little commoner and because she didn't commoners look up to her and elites hate her. She was a challenge to the power structure where only elites are allowed to make policy.

Like in Illinois, Alaska had a corrupt dominant party (Democrats in Chicago, Republicans in Alaska). Unlike Obama who went along to get along, Palin, a self proclaimed "Hockey Mom" took on her own Party and won. Obama votes "Present", works on the campaign of Rod B., has a slum lord on his election commission and then plays dumb when he and others get caught red handed with blatant corruption. The path that Obama took was dishonorable because he never demonstrated any courage and confronted corruption. Did Obama fight his own Party and confront the corruption like Palin did? No, he is a self promoting, self absorbed narcissist. Matt Damon talks about how terrifying it is to have Sarah Palin as President and uses the words "It's like a bad Disney Movie, like the Hockey Mom becomes President". Well what Damon won't tell you is that he and Ben Affleck started their career trying out for the Mickey Mouse Club. Walt Disney's characters were very American in nature because they were about the little guy having the strength and courage to step forward and take on the big bad guy. These were values that American families wanted for their children. Now I'm not a big Palin fan because I think she is also poisoned with vanity and I just want a normal person who wants what is best for the Nation first.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C6urw_PWHYk

from the article I posted before:

http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/353829,CST-NWS-rez23.article

[/quote]For more than five weeks during the brutal winter of 1997, tenants shivered without heat in a government-subsidized apartment building on Chicago's South Side.

It was just four years after the landlords -- Antoin "Tony'' Rezko and his partner Daniel Mahru -- had rehabbed the 31-unit building in Englewood with a loan from Chicago taxpayers.

It was just four years after the landlords -- Antoin "Tony'' Rezko and his partner Daniel Mahru -- had rehabbed the 31-unit building in Englewood with a loan from Chicago taxpayers.

Rezko and Mahru couldn't find money to get the heat back on.

But their company, Rezmar Corp., did come up with $1,000 to give to the political campaign fund of Barack Obama, the newly elected state senator whose district included the unheated building.

Obama has been friends with Rezko for 17 years. Rezko has been a political patron to Obama and many others, helping to raise millions of dollars for them through his own contributions and by hosting fund-raisers in his home.

mpr · Joined: 06 Jun 2009 Posts: 344

Kaidran · Joined: 17 Mar 2010 Posts: 289

John, do you think I care about Obama? Do you think I care about Patrick? I really dont. Obama has repeatedly disappointed me as a president, however he remains 10x better than any republican alternative. Did you read about the campaign McCain just ran arguing that he never claimed to be a "Maverick"(TM)? You really have no idea about my political ideology. I am frequently disgusted by Dem actions, particularly in the attempted budget cutting "This American Life" I posted a while back. I just look to the Republicans and see no answers only bigger problems.

I am continually bothered however by the string of hypocritical bullshit that you come out with. The Maher interview was railing against political correctness. Do you actually support political correctness, or is it only when liberals are making that case against it? Again it appears that any reference to mental disability in your mind is the butt of a joke because it is impossible for it to be anything else. Do you understand how limited that makes you? As I said I have not seen that Family Guy episode (again a FOX show) but it is hardly 60 Minutes, what do you expect? Your point that Maher and Beher were making jokes about Downs Syndrome were false and completely unsupported by the clip you posted.

I'm glad political children are off limits, it might have been cruel if anyone made any jokes about Chelsea Clinton... oh, wait a minute...

Do I think Imus was smart? No. Do I think Imus was right? No. But do I think what he said makes any difference to the people he was talking about? No. I wonder how many had even heard of him before. I do not believe in restricting his free speech, frankly as a liberal I would not restrict any of the right wing free speech because they ultimately push things beyond the level of common decency and end up hurting their own cause. This is what appears to have happened in this case, thought with the crap that Limbaugh (sp?), Beck etc comes out with I think Imus got a raw deal.

As I have said before the only view I have heard of Tea Partiers was from NPR. It described them as mostly over 40, white and more concerned with financial discipline than gay marriage. Hell apart from the age that could describe me. As I have also stated the only way they are going to achieve any real cuts to the budget, cuts that actually make a difference, is to cut the military or cut social security/medicare. When I see Tea Partier's with placards saying "Cut Medicare", then I will have some respect for their opinion. Until then they are simply naive or hypocrites.

balor123 · Joined: 08 Mar 2008 Posts: 1204

Thanks for the data mpr. The numbers are quite close for most states but there seems to be an inverse relationship between population and surplus taxes. Texas is a net provider and right in the middle of divorce rates. It says something that states like TX and CA are in the middle of the pack while other border states are at the top. States like MA appear near the bottom, I think, because we're able to price out the segments of the population where divorce rates are highest. States like TX and CA should be near the top given how many immigrants they house but since they're not that says something about their policies. Still, it is widely known that IL has the most corrupt state government and CA has the most ineffective. The government is basically shutting down in those states. If the economy doesn't improve soon, then the most responsible governments will also be non-existent governments. Even if they are net producers, I don't think they are responsible enough to figure out how to take that money they have and use it to maintain public services. It is part culture and part poor construction of government. This isn't the first time that states have run into trouble like this. I worry that Obama might step in and bail them out, setting a terrible precedent that I think we'll pay a heavy price for.

Xenos · Joined: 24 Jun 2009 Posts: 31 Location: Western Mass

John P -

you have heroically put a lot of information and argument forward, and I hate to dodge an argument by not responding to it, but I have friends who are smart, well educated, and who hold very high ethical standards, but who have, similar to you, been sucked in by the Fox propaganda network. keep in mind that the point of propaganda, at least in the Fox incarnation, is not to persuade others but to keep the faithfull firmly in line. It is propaganda to keep conservatives in line, thinking about Democrats, when they might otherwise question the Powers That Be in the Republican Party. Obsessing about Obama does exactly that.

Let us stipulate that everything you say about Obama is true. Then, what of it? It was not enough to slow down his popularity two years ago, and I have seen zero data that support the argument that independents, who have swung strongly against the Democrats, care about any of that information about Obama's character. These are people who once largely supported Obama, not because of political reasons (if they cared about politics they would not be independents) but because of pocketbook concerns. GOP rule had lead to financial chaos, they wanted to try someone else.

60% of this country are homeowners. I think Obama has done an excellent job (as good a job as a corrupt GOP would allow him to do) but for the non-political independents, they are still pissed over the loss of home values. Obama, whether by virtue or by failure, has not reinflated the housing bubble, and they are pissed about that. Obama's stimulus may have stopped a collapse in state and local government, but that does not seem like much when the rest of the economy is in a ditch and nobody, left or right, has any good or attractive ideas about how to turn it around.

These independents want their economy back, their stock investments back, their inflated home values back. They will swing from side to side looking for someone to give it to them. That is why they are pissed at Obama, and why they will be pissed at the GOP leadership in the house and senate in two years.

john p · Joined: 10 Mar 2006 Posts: 1820

MPR:

So I've got you pegged right, you don't like Catholics right?

MPR says:

mpr · Joined: 06 Jun 2009 Posts: 344

Xenos · Joined: 24 Jun 2009 Posts: 31 Location: Western Mass

[quote="john p"]

[quote]GOP rule had lead to financial chaos, they wanted to try someone else. [quote]

That is what they believed back in 2008. What led us to financial chaos was TOXIC ASSETS i.e. Toxic Asset Relief Program (TARP). Do some research as to what the toxic assets were and what policies in the past caused them. When you do some research you'll see how we've got the criminals now acting like policemen, judge and jury. The reason why we have the guilty people still in power is that people are refusing to open their minds to the possibility that their Party of choice is messing up and has some corrupt poverty pimps profiting on people's misfortune.

[/quote][/quote]

Man, you are one hell of an easy mark. Poverty pimps caused the toxic assets?

The whole shebang was of, by, and FOR banksters. Everybody else was a mark, even if they got some short term benefit out of it. Now the Democratic party is about 60% in the pocket of the banksters - including the Obama administration. The GOP is 100% in the pocket of the banksters. The Teapartisans are also 100% in the pocket of the banksters, but don't even know it. Because they are the worst marks of all, the lumpen-bourgiosie enforcers for the authoritarians who are funded by the corporate elites. Thank God they are mostly over the age of 50, because they are just an inch away from being full-fledged brownshirts.

mpr · Joined: 06 Jun 2009 Posts: 344

mpr · Joined: 06 Jun 2009 Posts: 344

John, here's a little titbit for you about your Church.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=126985072.

Well, I guess they dont let them burn people at the stake anymore,
so the poor things have to find some way to pass the time.

john p · Joined: 10 Mar 2006 Posts: 1820

MPR:
I agree that is a pretty disturbing situation. I think the Church does certain things for practical matters and gets it wrong on many case by case situations. Practically, if "the health of the mother" is an accepted exception, don't you think that we'd have a million "health of the mother" cases? They have practical reasons for not wanting gay marriage which relate more to hierarchy than spirituality so I disagree with them there. If Science has shown us anything it is that the baby is alive within the womb; we can see its heart beating, we can see it moving etc. In what other situation is one individual allowed to be killed to save the life of another individual? To the Catholic Church, it is a child not a choice.

The Catholics have saved millions of people from starvation; you won't hear that on NPR.

Xenos:

Look up who and when Adjustable Rate Mortgages were allowed and who pushed for them. Look up the Commodities Futures Modernization Act which allowed for Derivatives, increases in Debt Ratios and Credit Default Swaps (signed by Clinton). Look at the Ammendments of the Community Reinvestment Act which allowed for the Securitization of Subprime Loans (signed by Clinton). Look at Fannie and Freddie and who they contributed to/ bought off (Dodd and Obama at the top of the list). It goes on and on. This is your TARP; this was the poison. Do you homework.

Regarding Poverty Pimps, you've got different types. You have these elite academic types who feel like they are saving the world and get six figure salaries at non profits and the administrative costs take from the recipients who the taxpayers intended the money to go for. They are parasites who feed off the misfortune of others; and live a very comfortable life posing as a do gooder. Then you have the Tony Rezkos who administer a certain portion of government subsidies for construction. They take taxpayer money meant for the poor to help improve their housing and these guys pocket the money, don't turn on the heat and buy off the politicians to keep the money flowing and to keep people from investigating. This is Tony Rezko buying off Barack Obama. Then you have Deval Patrick who poses as a do gooder to provide political cover to Ameriquest, one of the worst predatory lenders that targetted the poor and minorities. He was a poverty pimp because he made hundreds of thousands by providing political cover to an organization who preyed on the poor. Now you have poverty pimps who push scratch tickets and casinos who profit on people's desperation; I guess that is a form of poverty pimp as well. I'd venture to guess that Barack Obama was a poverty pimp for writing about how hard it was in the "Hood" because he made millions from his book and he kept almost all of it, and used the initial money to buy himself a mansion with the help of one of the worst Poverty Pimps, Tony Rezko. Many of these do-gooder organizations have been infested by poverty pimps of some sort and it is political correctness which provides them cover.

Current Culture and the Housing Bubble:

I think cultural decisions are weighing in on the housing market because we all make decisions based on lifestyle and rates of returns and cultural connectedness to what we feel comfortable. I used to think that you had the basic choices of: a government job or nonprofit, a private sector job in the city or your own company, or an easy paced job in a low cost of living area. The government job used to get you stability but not riches. The private sector or self employment jobs used to get you more wealth but a harder work pace. The job out in the country used to not pay much but you could go fishing and get in touch with nature and have close relationships with family and friends because you had time to make them a priority etc.

Today, the payoff for the big career isn't there as much and the government jobs pay more now than the private sector for many levels, so many are thinking about saying it isn't worth it for all this stress and crappy way of life and if MPR didn't think that he'd have to live next door to the likes of a John P. he'd move out to the peace and quiet in a second.

Cultures of say the North End are mostly gone. The old school people sold out to the yuppies so it is just a facade like Little Italy at Epcot Center. Even Newton, which was comprised of many villages with neighborhoods and church communities are losing their connectedness and charm. People want the Norman Rockwell lifestyle but you can dress up and act the part, but if you raise your kids like greedy self absorbed individuals who don't care about anyone but themselves, that nice little town is just a facade.

This guy here talks alot about how modern thinking individuals are trying to find their way in today's world and how there are migration patterns that relate to culture and things are emerging that most didn't think was possible and isn't on the radar of many. I think the whole "God is Dead" movement is realizing that without Religion many people become pretty self absorbed and greedy and a society without altruism eats itself. Many of the cities that have gone bad have just too many selfish people. People are leaving companies and communities because they realize that they are snake pits (too many selfish people).

http://www.joelkotkin.com/

I want people to have these discussions to help open their minds to a lifestyle choice that may be more suitable for them and to not shut their mind to a possibility due to a preconceived notion (me included).

Kaidran · Joined: 17 Mar 2010 Posts: 289

I'm guessing that Richard Dawkins did not write The Selfish Gene to advocate a pro religion stance. (Call it a hunch.) The Catholicism does explain your hatred of Bill Maher though.

john p · Joined: 10 Mar 2006 Posts: 1820

I don't know whether or to what degree it is nature or nurture, but the most successful communities are those that look out for one another as well as themselves. Most organized religions promote such behavior, it is when they are under attack or overtaken by selfish people that they become violent.

Bill Maher enjoys the brutality in what he feels is being brutally honest. He stands out because most people pussyfoot in this politically correct world and he stomps with a big impression. I liked it when he was talking to some "Queen" of some Middle Eastern Nation and was like "What is this the 13th Century where we have Queens and Kings? I don't believe in kings and queens but that doesn't mean I'm going to make fun of someone from England for doing so. Basically he doesn't tolerate or respect others because he sees us backsliding for doing so. In some instances he is right, but he hasn't found a respectful way of finding his voice.

Kaidran · Joined: 17 Mar 2010 Posts: 289

I think the part I have issue with is the idea that religion = selfless and non-religion = selfish. I just dont see how you can reasonably apply the Dawkins Hawk/Dove principle along religious lines. I also dont get why religious people have to play victim all the time. Who is attacking you? Who is overtaking you and necessitating that you become violent? A lot of people resist being told what to do by you but that is not attacking you. A lot of people have little respect for the actions of your church (as you yourself have acknowledged) but that is not stopping you from doing anything. Why do you have to become violent? Whose ass would Jesus kick?

And feel free to go to town on the Queen, she is big girl and does not need me to defend her. She is more or less a living English "Uncle Sam" and has no actual power. It just means you have a neutral figurehead so you bypass the "vote Republican or you're unpatriotic" arguments you get here. I'm not sure how many Americans actually realize that.