There's the medical coverage too. Ontario workers are $4 an hour cheaper to employ because of Canada's single-payer health system -- and they're healthier too.
Posted by sagesource at July 4, 2005 07:39 PMThis is one of the puzzlements of living in the Age of Corporate Hegemony. So many of the political actions corporations support and subsidize by campaign bribery actually make it worse for them in the long run. If the state doesn't collect taxes it can't pay for good teachers and good schools. That means the workforce will be undertrained and your ultimate costs for training them once they are adults will skyrocket. If you depress wages to below-poverty levels, your consumer base will eventually evaporate. If you oppose single payer health care eventually the costs of employer-paid insurance will bankrupt you and the state will go broke trying to make up for the gaps with ballooning Medicaid programs. That's not to mention what happens to productivity when workers get sick and can't get care. The idea of long-term investment in government services just doesn't occur to these geniuses.
Posted by mamayaga at July 4, 2005 07:50 PMI posted this story yesterday up on skippy and KOS, too. It's always good to show that "edduckashun is importint"
Posted by jillian at July 4, 2005 07:59 PMPoor education and voting for losers go hand in hand. The goal is to keep the masses uneducated down in the southern states so that they'll vote with emotions and not with their brain. Don't want no snake oil salesmen with promises of better health care, better education, and better wages, no sir.
Posted by Nimby at July 4, 2005 08:18 PMI knew it would come to this some day.
Posted by Brian Bell at July 4, 2005 08:33 PMmamayaga,
I completely agree. I think the problem is that in our short attention span society there is this enormous disconnect.
If people don't seen an immediate and/or verifiable return on the taxes they pay (e.g. If A then B) then they won't support it. Long term investment such as education just doesn't register. The anti-tax, self-reliance crowd (in general), doesn't understand the value of the overall support systems that the community, as a whole, provide for them: "I made my money by working hard for it!" No mind is paid to how much a well educated, healthy society benefits them.
A perfect example is my brother who is a proud member of the educated, born-again, "work harder: millions one welfare are depending on you" crew. He litteraly said to me after the '04 election: "Relax, I've never seen an example where an elected official has affected my life directly."
I was so dumbfounded that I didn't even bother to respond.
Posted by Simp the Biodiesel Pimp at July 4, 2005 08:35 PMGod forbide the South ever became too educated. The GOP would loose half of their voting base.
Posted by Judith at July 4, 2005 08:42 PMWhile I'm in agreement with you, this is an example of why liberal is a four letter word with uneducated, poor white southerners. This kind of patronizing is what sends them running into the arms of the rethugs. Instead of attacking them personally, why don't you frame your arguments in the context of how they are victimized by the rethug system; no healthcare, underfunded education, etc.?
Posted by Jesusland Joe at July 4, 2005 09:02 PMGood point Jesusland Joe.
Posted by Steve Soto at July 4, 2005 09:19 PMI live in Atlanta (because of my job). I would never open a business here (or move one here) because of the labor force---passive, inefficient, poorly prepared academically. yes, it's a stereotype, but the northern transplants tend to stand out as better employees.
My dad was an auto worker, btw. Much of the work requires a lot of skill, e.g., designing and making tools and dies and many less complicated tasks reuire the use of a computer.
Posted by Rich at July 4, 2005 09:32 PMAmerican business has known this same thing for years.
why don't you frame your arguments in the context of how they are victimized by the rethug system; no healthcare, underfunded education, etc.?
Did it for years. They then voted against their best interests based on what they were told by their fundamentalist or evangelical whore preachers. They are getting what they deserve and what they asked for.
Posted by phidipides at July 4, 2005 09:53 PMAt some point in the not-so-distant future you're going to realize just how many ways you fucked up by saying what you just said. I hate the South with a passion, but shitting on Southern WORKERS isn't part of my anger. If there was ever a post that gives credence to the idea of 'elites' on the far-left, it's this one.
Which raises an interesting question. How many of those Southern workers would be stupid and insensitive enough to have written what you just wrote?
Posted by Burble at July 4, 2005 10:16 PMPhid, again, I agree except for your last sentence. They don't deserve it, they're victims and when they're blamed for their own predicament, deserved or not, it insults them and bruises their pride. Winning this constituency back is frustrating and difficult but it is an cause worth the effort and it won't be successful until they're not patronized with disdain for their real or perceived stupidity.
Posted by Jesusland Joe at July 4, 2005 10:27 PM
You know what, Jesusland Joe and Burble, I used to agree with what you guys are saying. But, not anymore. For now, I think the people you folks imply are being stereotyped need to understand what they have done, what kind of policies they have voted for and embraced. They need to feel it. Only after that will they begin to get a clue. Until the pain becomes too great, they will not change their attitudes, their votes.
Posted by Brian Bell at July 4, 2005 10:46 PM
> God forbide the South ever became too educated. The GOP would loose half of their voting base.
"loose" -> "lose"
Post in haste, repent at leisure. :-)
Posted by JohnB at July 5, 2005 12:18 AMWith all due respect, Jessuland Joe, if you'd carefully read the comments preceding your post, you would realize that many of them are framed in the context you suggest. The thoughtful analysis and criticism of red state economic policy choices and consequences should not be mistaken for the stereotypical put-downs of southerners or red staters.
Posted by fafnir at July 5, 2005 02:16 AMSo, why is it that Toyota is or just opened a plant in San Antonio? That the plant had hiring restrictions of people living within a one county of Bexar County. My eyes must not be soo good. Maybe thats not a Toyota plant. No the Dem website "Burntorangereport.com" said it was, so it must be true.
Even Gomer Pyle could see thru this "pessimist".
Posted by peter at July 5, 2005 04:02 AMpeter,
San Antonio is not the Southeast. The demographic (and work ethic) found there is a little different than that in {Birmingham, Jackson, Nashville, Atlanta, Columbia}
Posted by the professor at July 5, 2005 05:27 AMJust to elaborate on Peter's comparison using San Antonio.
San Antonio has gone through several major military base closings. There are a good number of people who were well trained in aircraft maintainence who lost their jobs. I expect Toyota will have a good sized pool of job candidates instead of your average Bubba.
One other point: I took a job transfer out of San Antonio and would NEVER consider moving back to a banjo state. Way too many ignorant, bible thumping dipsticks. The school systems are underfunded and not nearly as good as up here in Illinois.
Posted by weinerdog43 at July 5, 2005 05:41 AMThey don't deserve it, they're victims and when they're blamed for their own predicament, deserved or not, it insults them and bruises their pride.
Victims? Did they, or did they not, repeatedly vote Republican over the last couple decades? The fact that Republicans convinced them to vote against their best interests by encouraging their bigotries does not excuse this horrible lack of judgment on the part of the [White] Southern Worker.
They choose, on an ongoing basis, bigotry over modernity. It's you people, who imply that somehow they never really had a choice--that they're simply being tricked into being bigots--who are being paternalistic. They have always had a choice, and they have consistently chosen wrong.
Their pride deserves to be bruised. We'll be here waiting for them when--if--they finally wise up, but in the meantime, I'm not willing to say, "Poor White Southerners. We feel your pain; what do we need to do for your votes? Outlaw abortion maybe? Confederate flags? Stigmatize some gays? No more teaching evolution? Whatever it takes."
Posted by Matt Davis at July 5, 2005 06:21 AMMatt, et al., who are taking my to the woodshed for my posts. I'm talking about language and not making excuses. This constituency can't be won over without starting a conversation with them. The conversation can't be started when they're approached with the the kind of disdain you have for them. We all agree and are angered that the bigotry, the ignorance, the homophobia, etc.--all is exploited by the rethugs.
The liberal/progressive attitude and language has to be changed from "you're stupid and you deserve what you're getting" to "bless your heart, the evil rethugs/evangelicals are taking advantage of you, here is an alternative, here why it makes sense and here is how you get a better deal than what you're getting."
Nothing is accomplished by talking down to this constituency but much could be accomplished by talking with them without the contempt and in a language they understand and embrace.
Posted by Jesusland Joe at July 5, 2005 07:28 AMNothing is accomplished by talking down to this constituency but much could be accomplished by talking with them without the contempt and in a language they understand and embrace.
I would counter that their language itself needs work.
The entire White Southern ideology is built around long-nursed grudges. One of the most deeply-felt of those grudges happens to be the one held toward people like me. The notion that I need to be the one to change my thinking, so that they will let me help them stop fucking themselves, seems pretty stupid.
Posted by Matt Davis at July 5, 2005 07:36 AMOf course, the only income demographic Kerry won in 2004 was the folks making under $30K.
$30-50K was a statistical tie.
$50-75K was a Bush landslide.
$75K-100K was a Bush landslide.
$100-200K was a Bush landslide.
$200K- was a Bush landslide.
(Links previously provided, ad nauseum).
So, you're telling me that all the smart people in America make under $30K, while the dumb folk are making over $50K?
Posted by muckdog at July 5, 2005 08:07 AMWell Matt, don't ya know it's us Northerners that are responsible for the Southerner's attitudes. Shame on us. What a crock.
Posted by Judith at July 5, 2005 08:16 AMMatt, i think this thread has transcended the political realm into an area in which I'm certainly not qualified to comment. My points were made to all of you as purveyors of political/social commentary and analysis. My suggestions are made in the context of progressively advancing the political discourse of the country. Some of the personal bias provides ammunition for the fascists to justify their "elitist" accusations.
Posted by Jesusland Joe at July 5, 2005 08:26 AMSome of the personal bias provides ammunition for the fascists to justify their "elitist" accusations.
True. I would argue, though, that anything I say will be viewed through a predetermined "lens" that insists I am an elitist Yankee, so I don't know that I could change that view even if I stopped haranguing White Southerners for their idiotic political decision-making.
Sometimes, it's important not to hand one's opponents ammunition; other times, it's important to remember that we can't win if we stop shooting.
Posted by Matt Davis at July 5, 2005 08:32 AMSo, you're telling me that all the smart people in America make under $30K, while the dumb folk are making over $50K?
Posted by muckdog at July 5, 2005 08:07 AM
No, we're telling you that we don't believe your Repugnicant talking point any more now than when you got it hot off the Regnery Press.
Smarter ditto monkeys, please...
Posted by (: tom :) at July 5, 2005 08:38 AMHow many of those Southern workers would be stupid and insensitive enough to have written what you just wrote?
Every one of them. Especially those that condemn us to their very concrete conception of hell first.
$50-75K was a Bush landslide. ad nauseum
Excuse me. This is the same logic that makes the idiot son think he has a mandate. The count, from Diebold, was 48.6% Kerry, 51.1% isoGBush, and the house races R = 49.5% to R = 48.7%. No landslide.
Now, the reported incomes of those voting come from the same exit polls that had Kerry leading 51% to 49%. To accept your numbers means we have to accept that Kerry won the election and there is a common usurper, as well as moron, in the office as we speak. Which way do you want it?
Where Bush led was with the "White Cracker at all income levels" and the TaliEvanFundi vote. And these people got exactly what they wanted. Schiavo, death in Iraq, and a stagnant economy with 7% rates of inflation.
Posted by phidpides at July 5, 2005 08:43 AMR = 49.5% to R = 48.7%
Of course, this is Republi-cons = 49.5% to Deocrats = 48.7%.
Posted by phidipides at July 5, 2005 08:49 AMI've posted the links. Numbers don't lie.
Posted by muckdog at July 5, 2005 10:53 AMThis constituency can't be won over without starting a conversation with them. Nothing is accomplished by talking down to this constituency but much could be accomplished by talking with them without the contempt and in a language they understand and embrace.
I'm struck by the thought that since we are talking about the power base of the GOP, we progressives are supposed to be typical liberals and understand and accept these poor illiterate and unemployable Southerners [Toyota's implication, not mine] as they are.
But if we shift the topic to the patriots of Iraq who choose to reject the imposition of a foreign government upon them, all of a sudden it's 'kill them all and let Allah sort them out' for daring to disagree with our plans for their future.
You wrong-wingers can't have it both ways. Pick one.
Posted by pessimist at July 5, 2005 11:16 AMLook at that ass-whoopin' Kerry gave Bush on the under $15K demographic!
2004 Election Breakdown
Annual Income % Bush Kerry
Under $15,000 8% 36% 63%
$15-$30,000 15% 42% 57%
$30-$50,000 22% 49% 50%
$50,000-$75,000 23% 56% 43%
$75-$100,000 14% 55% 45%
$100-$150,000 11% 57% 42%
$150,000-$200,000 4% 58% 42%
Above $200,000 3% 63% 35%
I've posted the links. Numbers don't lie.
Posted by muckdog at July 5, 2005 10:53 AM
Yes, but Repugnicant, Pinhead fellating trolls who comment at the Left Coaster do!
Shouldn't you be volunteering for duty somewhere, muck filled pus toad?
Posted by (: Tom :) at July 5, 2005 11:44 AMYour graph appears to have been posted:
2:53 p.m. ET, July 4.
I knew it was bogus when I found the line about Bu$h approval that read:
Approve 90% 9%
Disapprove 6% 93%
Then I saw the racial breakdown (Bu$h/Kerry):
White 58% 41%
Black 11% 88%
Latino 44% 53%
Asian 44% 56%
Other 40% 54%
And no methodology. Therefore, nothing about this poll can be considered valid.
Try again, muck.
Posted by pessimist at July 5, 2005 12:00 PMWait!
muckdog made a valid point.
He has posted those statistics ad nauseum!
Posted by at July 5, 2005 12:47 PMLOL, just because you don't like the truth.
All those smart Kerry voters! Kerry's plank really opened up a can of whoop ass on Bush in the under $30K crowd, eh? It was a spanking. Bush wasn't even close in the under $30K demographic.
Send your hate mail to CNN.
Posted by muckdog at July 5, 2005 01:08 PMCorrelation is not causation. Higher income people tend to lean Republican. That has been true scince U.S. Grant was president. Even in Democratic landslide years like 1936 and 1964, GOP precints can be found at the upper income levels.
That's only true for individuals, not for the states as a whole, unless you want to make an arguement that the Rocky Mountian and Southern states suddenly have higher incomes than the Northeastern and Pacific coast states.
Voting by education is a demographic that has changed. It used to be that there was a linier relationship between higher education and voting GOP, no more. Today, the GOP does have the middle in education (high school grad and some college) whereas the Democrats have the two ends (less than high school and college grad.).
This is where all the economic and social issues come into play. Republican have had success in the last 30 years in getting lower income whites, especially in the South, to vote culturally rather than economically.
What do we do? Some red state Democrats like NC's Mike Easley are good examples of how to be populist and successful in the South. It might even help to watch a cartoon.
Honestly, I hsve neighbors who remind me quite a lot of the characters in King of the Hill. I'm not going to pretend that a deep South state like Alabama is likely to go Democrat any time soon, but, with work, the upper south states like Virginia, North Carolina and Tennissiee could be brought back to their more moderate tradition.
Posted by rlprather at July 5, 2005 02:13 PMThere you go, rl. A completely valid (and rational) response. Not like the other ones offered.
I don't think education is as important as motivation when it comes to being successful and making the big incomes, though.
(Motivation and the willingness to take risks.)
Posted by muckdog at July 5, 2005 03:10 PMHey, muckdog- nothin' riles 'em more'n pointing out that 'ol cognitive dissonance thang.
rich- here's yore hat, wish y'all could stay longer.
Keep talking down to us. It saves our party millions in campaign funds that we can spend elsewhere.
Posted by Marcus Agrippa at July 5, 2005 06:36 PMI am a little bit surprised at the prejudice displayed toward southerers. (Especially here among this crowd of "progressives.")
Posted by Andy at July 5, 2005 07:40 PMMuckdog,
Your point seemed to fall on deaf ears. The young "progressives" on this blog are for the most part, LOW INCOME. Many still live at home, and let's be realistic - the only hope they ever will own their own homes is that their folks die & leave em one.
So you insult em when you point out that low income folks supported Kerry, because, well... it's true.
It is also interesting to point out that WELFARE folks supported Kerry en masse. Take a look at the red-blue map, broken down by precinct/county.
Anyone who is familiar with America will immediately recognize little blue pockets scattered in a sea of red. The bread basket of America is one red blob. The inner city ghettos (welfare) are ALL blue. Every Indian reservation in America (solid welfare vote) is blue.
You keep hearing these young progressives blather on about the close popular vote. So? It is the electoral college that counts. Most these kids would much rather toss out the electoral system, because they don't even understand it's purpose; which is to prevent the tyranny of the majority.
It is always the Dems who want to lower the voting age, allow felons to vote, and get the vote out among the young (& ignorant). The GOP wants the opposite - a low turnout. A low turnout is ALWAYS better for GOP - without fail. That's because educated people tend to vote - as they have something to lose (their tax dollars).
Uneducated (and as you mentioned, often poor) folks don't tend to vote, because THEY DON'T PAY INCOME TAXES ANYWAY.
That's why Dems ALWAYS support spending (it doesn't cost em anything, and they might get something for nothing.)
The bread basket of America is one red blob.
And Lord knows no federal money flows into the good old self sufficient hard working bread basket!
Except for that little itty bitty trickle of farm subsidies.
Schmuck.
Posted by at July 6, 2005 08:09 AMSend your hate mail to CNN.
Posted by muckdog at July 5, 2005 01:08 PM
Send your bullshit to the Little Green Fascists and the FReepertrash. I believe your shrill whinings about income versus voting were debunked in a previous comments thread.
Keep talking down to us. It saves our party millions in campaign funds that we can spend elsewhere.
Posted by Marcus Agrippa at July 5, 2005 06:36 PM
Keep sneering at us and calling us unamerican. It shows more of the unenlightened what repulsive uncaring amoral assholes the Repugnicants who have stolen the Republican party are.
Posted by (: Tom :) at July 6, 2005 09:09 AMJuly 6,
Funny that you mention farm subsidies. Do you have a clue what is driving the farm subisidies?
The food stamp program is driving the farm subsidies.
The market for flour and low cost corn syrup, which is the basis for about half of America's "food", drives farm subsidies.
If you do a bit of research, you will find a direct money trail from the sugar/junk food industries to the politicians of both parties.
This is precisely why you will not find ONE SINGLE SOLITARY congressman or administration official who will attempt to restrict food stamp recipientd from purchasing ice cream, soda pop, and trashy breakfast cereals for their kiddies.
It would be interesting to know the damage done to America's population (especially the low income portion) by the horrific diet they are encouraged to eat & feed their kids.
It is no surprise that among America's "poor", the biggest health risk is from OVEREATING, and from eating junk food, high in simple carbs, low in nutrition. It is a national scandal, yet you will not find a mention of it anywhere. Try!
Any politician who tries to reduce farm subsidies or restrict food stamp uses to nutritional food only, will be trashed and destroyed instantaneously, never to be heard from again. Don't believe it? Try finding one such politician, anywhere. (of either party)
You won't.
Posted by Bones at July 6, 2005 09:28 AMI tend to agree with Jesusland Joe, calling southerners stupid is counterproductive and I would like to think beneath us. On the other hand this site does have its fair share of mindless flamers so I am probably wrong. My father consistently votes republican, we argue issuses and sometimes he agrees with me; but the moment I call him stupid that would end the dialogue. Someone above said that southerners need to feel the effects of what they have done. They are feeling them. Their children are not getting a good education, their infrastructure is coming apart and their large metrapolitan areas are becoming unlivable. You telling them they are stupid crackers does not inspire self-critical thought and introspection; it makes them forget about their problems and focus on the "liberal elites" that don't respect them.
bones,
You can't change the fact that more federal tax money flows into red states on average then flows into blue states. Your bullshit about welfare sucking America dry is just that. Bullshit.
And why is it that you never post any links to your sources? Please. A link to a source that discusses the coorelation between farm subsiides and junk food consumption and its relation to food stamps. Please. Just once.
Posted by at July 6, 2005 10:38 AMSomeone above said that southerners need to feel the effects of what they have done. They are feeling them. Their children are not getting a good education, their infrastructure is coming apart and their large metrapolitan areas are becoming unlivable.
And what do these 'geenyusses' do about it? They continue to vote for Republicans.
This does not inspire a great deal of respect when someone refuses to see that they are the solution to their own problems and do nothing but make them worse.
Posted by pessimist at July 6, 2005 11:37 AMRight on, Jesusland Joe. This post is really offensive, and as Joe points out, completely misses the problems with racism, regressive taxation, and gross underfunding of education in Southern states. Pessimist, are you including in your stereotype working-class African Americans who are trying to get good factory jobs (e.g., Mercedes plant in Tuscaloosa), despite the fact that many are the products of schools that were designed to be inferior? As a Southerner myself, I'm sick of hearing liberals call Red State people stupid. That doesn't help our cause one bit. No wonder they think we're elitist assholes.
Posted by Gatorchick at July 6, 2005 01:41 PMHey Bones,
Regarding the felon vote- they know a constituency when they see one.
Hey:Tom:
Sneer. Unamerican.
Posted by Marcus Agrippa at July 6, 2005 04:54 PMJuly 6,
Experience teaches me that giving references to hostile individuals is like pissing in the wind. Nothing good comes of it. It isn't likely to be read. If it is, it will be misconstrued.
Your last post had more false statements than I could count. What's the point?
Posted by Bones at July 6, 2005 06:38 PMExperience teaches me that giving references to hostile individuals is like pissing in the wind. Nothing good comes of it. It isn't likely to be read. If it is, it will be misconstrued.
Tranlation: I'm too good to post for you. What a complete prick.
Posted by sage at July 6, 2005 07:41 PMSage,
It never fails, when the truth becomes too much to bear.
Child-like insults and name calling are all you've got on your side. No evidence, no logic; no reasoning. Just insults such as one might hear on the school playground.
And from a teacher! Heaven forbid. I feel for your students for the example you must set for them. Perhaps they will aspire to Jerry Springer guests.
Posted by Bones at July 7, 2005 11:21 AMNo evidence
That is correct Bones, you never offer any evidence to back up your claims.
Posted by sage at July 7, 2005 12:20 PM