• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Re Pub Voters "Voting Against Their Interest"

J

jhmd2000

Unacceptably correct
Joined
Mar 26, 2011
Messages
21,040
Reaction score
1,448
http://www.nationalreview.com/artic...ive-values-medicaid-voting-against-interests-

And so we’re left with an odd definition of “interests.” For years the Left has unapologetically waged regulatory and rhetorical war on coal, implementing policies that were most assuredly not in the economic interests of Kentucky’s mining families. But now those same families are going to let bygones be bygones and rally around a second-rate welfare program advanced by the same movement? Some will. But some will quite reasonably look at a bigger picture and distrust the party that helped bring them to penury.
 
https://consortiumnews.com/2017/04/22/coal-miners-futures-in-renewable-energy/

"Mining employment in the area has plummeted from more than 14,000 jobs in 2008 to fewer than 4,000 today, owing to mine automation, competition from natural gas, and environmental controls on dirty coal emissions.

Even if Trump’s administration and Congress roll back clean air and water rules, most experts agree that coal-mining jobs are not coming back, particularly in Appalachia where production costs are relatively high."
 
nice spin here. "they're just voting their deeply held fiscal conservative values. For example, in the long run, it will definitely be in their interest to kill off the rural hospitals they depend on because it's more efficient economically speaking, for them to drive 3 hours to a city. or just die, that helps out, too"
 
Republicans on fast food jobs: You want $15/hour to flip burgers? Get a better job or suck it up.

Republicans on coal jobs: Aww those mean old Dems took away your jobs. Wait here and we'll fix that for you.
 
BarcaDeac said:
Republicans on fast food jobs: You want $15/hour to flip burgers? Get a better job or suck it up.

Republicans on coal jobs: Aww those mean old Dems took away your jobs. Wait here and we'll fix that for you.
Click to expand...

Weird. What could be the difference between fast food jobs and coal jobs to generate such a response?
 
Coal mining jobs aren't coming back. Well, they might is horse and buggies return.
 
Great article.

It’s not that simple, and wealthy progressives — the very people who are most likely to advance the argument that working-class Republicans vote against their interests — understand this all too well. Why? Because they don’t apply this kind of crude economic calculus to their own votes. Wealthy liberals routinely vote for higher taxes to fund public schools, state and federal welfare programs, and other government benefits that they’ll never use. Why? Because they are trying not just to maximize personal benefit but to create a particular kind of society that they believe is most conducive to human flourishing. They’re not simply thinking about themselves — and that’s to their credit.

It’s time for progressives to understand that conservatives have the same mindset, just filtered through a fundamentally different ideology. David Brooks argued in a July 4 column on this same topic that most Americans “vote on the basis of their vision of what makes a great nation.” He’s absolutely correct, and our “interests” depend on the complex interplay between our faith, our families, and our communities. For example, is a person who enjoys more religious freedom but has less economic stability better off than a person whose liberty is diminished but has reliable health insurance? All too many progressives think there’s an easy answer to that question. They’re wrong.
Click to expand...

This board is a great illustration of the progressive line of thinking that bigger government is always better*.

* - Just as long as someone else is writing the check or picking up the tab
 
Colonel Angus said:
Great article.



This board is a great illustration of the progressive line of thinking that bigger government is always better*.

* - Just as long as someone else is writing the check or picking up the tab
Click to expand...

if anything, the article does a great job illustrating that, on a scale of national policy, people have no idea what their best interests are and so vote against them almost constantly. So if that's the case, arguing they shouldn't do so is meaningless.
 
Democracy is destined for ruin when paired with an extremely capitalist society. Humans are inherently greedy, and there are too many rubes that will take a small benefit for just them now instead of potentially HUGE benefits for everyone (themselves included) later because "Gotta protect what's mine!"
 
jhmd2000 said:
http://www.nationalreview.com/artic...ive-values-medicaid-voting-against-interests-

And so we’re left with an odd definition of “interests.” For years the Left has unapologetically waged regulatory and rhetorical war on coal, implementing policies that were most assuredly not in the economic interests of Kentucky’s mining families. But now those same families are going to let bygones be bygones and rally around a second-rate welfare program advanced by the same movement? Some will. But some will quite reasonably look at a bigger picture and distrust the party that helped bring them to penury.
Click to expand...

I would argue that this article should be used for toilet paper...

"Let’s move beyond Kentucky and its coal. Family dissolution is perhaps America’s foremost driver of poverty and dependency. The rules are simple. Follow the “success sequence” — graduate high school, get a job, get married, and then have kids — and your poverty rate is extremely low. Deviate, and the problems magnify. Now, between the two parties, which one has centered its appeal around married parents with kids and which party has doubled down on single moms?"

you know where a HS diploma type of job and kids gets you in a single working parent household? Onto government assistance (do not pass go or collect $200).

https://www.usatoday.com/story/mone...lege-grads-and-everyone-else-record/96493348/

"College graduates, on average, earned 56% more than high school grads in 2015, according to data compiled by the Economic Policy Institute. That was up from 51% in 1999 and is the largest such gap in EPI's figures dating to 1973." "The dominance of college graduates in the economy is, if anything, accelerating. Last year, for the first time, a larger proportion of workers were college grads (36%) than high school-only grads (34%), Carnevale's research found. The number of employed college grads has risen 21% since the recession began in December 2007, while the number of employed people with only a high school degree has dropped nearly 8%."
 
http://www.suzukielders.org/the-pros-and-cons-of-nuclear-power-versus-coal/

"In summary, although recent events at Fukushima warn us that safety standards and compliance must be improved, nuclear power plants operating normally produce less greenhouse gas and toxic emissions, less global environmental damage, and fewer health issues than coal-burning power plants. Neither represents a safe, sustainable, energy choice, but given a choice between these two, nuclear power comes out on top. "


Well, yes, thanks Obama!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top