I really wish we could reasonably perform an experiment

[Ragnar]

Lets consider this lil analogy. Lets say I live in a small area of 10 people that represents a state. lets say 4 of these people pay 75 percent of the taxes. That means 6 pay 25 percent of the taxes. Now lets say three of the 75 percent vote conservative thats 56 percent of the income from the state is from conservatives even if 7 of 10 people in that state vote for a liberal candidate. So the state is a "blue" state even though the majority of the money comes from conservatives. So do you see the flaw in the study? Its not the most accurate representation but its definately easy to see what Im saying and how the study is flawed.

The problem with your analogy is it is not based in reality.

Liberals on the average earn more than CON$, so on the average the majority of the tax revenue comes from Libs no matter what the state.

Ah. Simple solution to that then. End progressive taxation so the rich get their fair share.

 

[hjmick]

I think my box is full...

Here, take a read:

Did Prop 8 Voters Know What They Were Voting For? - Newsweek

Yeah, I've read that. I don't put much into that. I'm sure some people did do that, however not enough to change the results. Considering how much we heard about it across the country, I can only imagine how it was in California.

That was the last voting cycle before I left the state. I didn't find it all that confusing. It was one of the more contentious issues in recent memory...

I find the suggestion that voters were "confused" to be rather insulting. Whether thase who read the piece or not believed it, to suggest such a thing because the vote didn't go the way the author thought it should strikes me as somewhat, I don't know... snotty.

 

[Leweman]

Cause Im sick of all the talk and want to see what would happen. For the entire span of this country both sides take credit when things go well and blame the other side when things go bad. If they seperated and formed governments based on their ideals and philosphies and those states either thrived or failed then we would know, beyond a doubt which side, if either would deserve the credit. Once again you dont take the time to think deeper and outside the box. Youve already got me labled and therefore Im already wrong no matter what I say. Well done my friend.

So wait, you're sick of all the talk so you want to listen to people talk about it some more? It's not like what is said here is going to happen.

I'm still waiting for your answers. I'm not labeling you by the way. I'm giving you a opportunity to give me a precise answer. The floor is yours, again.

Well Im more frustrated with all the talk than sick of it so sick is a bad choice of words I suppose. Im not going to stop expressing what I think would work best in situations, not that my opinions would matter. I assume thats why we are all here on this board becase we are frustrated with the way the government works and we want to express our opinions on how to improve things. And you make a good point of saying that way we say here is not going to happen. People are a proud bunch and the easiest way to lose an argument is to tell the other person they are wrong. Once that is said then no matter what that person says isnt going to change their mind. I think our pride sometimes is going to be the death of us. We wont give credit where credit is due and wont accept that we make mistakes. We divide ourselves into two groups and think one side is right 100 percent of the time and the other guy is wrong 100 percent of the time. If we ever want to fix ourselves as a nation we need to realize thats not possible. I would like to see this experiment and see how it works out because I think that they both need one another in doses in order to survive. But in reality we will never know. I can't be anymore precise on what you want its getting late and I have to get up soon. I will try to answer better come tomorrow. Ill talk to yall soon.

 

[Modbert]

Well Im more frustrated with all the talk than sick of it so sick is a bad choice of words I suppose. Im not going to stop expressing what I think would work best in situations, not that my opinions would matter. I assume thats why we are all here on this board becase we are frustrated with the way the government works and we want to express our opinions on how to improve things. And you make a good point of saying that way we say here is not going to happen. People are a proud bunch and the easiest way to lose an argument is to tell the other person they are wrong. Once that is said then no matter what that person says isnt going to change their mind. I think our pride sometimes is going to be the death of us. We wont give credit where credit is due and wont accept that we make mistakes. We divide ourselves into two groups and think one side is right 100 percent of the time and the other guy is wrong 100 percent of the time. If we ever want to fix ourselves as a nation we need to realize thats not possible. I would like to see this experiment and see how it works out because I think that they both need one another in doses in order to survive. But in reality we will never know. I can't be anymore precise on what you want its getting late and I have to get up soon. I will try to answer better come tomorrow. Ill talk to yall soon.

Protip: Space out your posts.

Onto your post now. I don't think you're getting what I'm asking. I was merely asking you for your own opinion on what would make a Conservative country and asked for specifics. I got none from you.

To address what you bolded, except in this case, you seemed to be encouraging such division which makes no sense to me.

Hopefully you can give me a definition tomorrow, I only asked you for hours tonight.

 

[ConHog]

Yep thats the one. If you know anything about just how prop 8 got passed you would understand a few things about this state. The governor is a kennedy puppet, cators to liberal special interests and has his hands tied by liberal.

Yep that califronia.

Prop 8 was passed, that alone would qualify California as not being a Liberal state. Arnie doesn't seem that Liberal to me either. Though people seem to not separate in this case, Democrats philosophy and Liberal philosophy. Just because one is a Liberal does not make them a Democrat. Just like because one is a Conservative does not make them a Republican.

You are an idiot. CA is a liberal state. Look at their representation in Congress, and check out there record in Presidential elections.

ModMoron

 

[Modbert]

and check out there record in Presidential elections.

ModMoron

Ronald Wilson Reagan (February 6, 1911 – June 5, 2004) was the 40th President of the United States (1981–1989) and the 33rd Governor of California (1967–1975).[1]

California Presidential Election Voting History

While growth in the Latino population has helped make California a reliably Democratic state today, this was not always the case. In fact, from 1952 through 1988, Republicans won every presidential election except the landslide loss of Barry Goldwater in 1964.

 

[saveliberty]

did you even look at the article? it opens with:

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger says the state is running a budget deficit because we pay more in federal taxes than we get back in federal spending. The biggest cause of the deficit is the governor.

in this particular instance, you find boxer's numbers more useful...

that's pretty funny.

No clue on where Boxer gets her numbers from. Saveliberty sure is trying his darnest to actually invalidate my link without actually posting any evidence of his own. He clearly has no idea what he's talking about, especially since he originally accused the website I got the study from to be the one behind the study.

You would just rather live in the past (2004) than face reality. At least Jillian and the Governator are in there with you, so your not alone. Epic Fail on your part.

 

[The Rabbi]

you saw what a so-called conservative government was for 8 years....

and we ended in a financial meltdown.... and in two unnecessary wars.

still waiting...

Memo: If you think Bush was a conservative you have no idea what you're talking about.

 

[The Rabbi]

Yep thats the one. If you know anything about just how prop 8 got passed you would understand a few things about this state. The governor is a kennedy puppet, cators to liberal special interests and has his hands tied by liberal.

Yep that califronia.

Prop 8 was passed, that alone would qualify California as not being a Liberal state. Arnie doesn't seem that Liberal to me either. Though people seem to not separate in this case, Democrats philosophy and Liberal philosophy. Just because one is a Liberal does not make them a Democrat. Just like because one is a Conservative does not make them a Republican.

You are an idiot. CA is a liberal state. Look at their representation in Congress, and check out there record in Presidential elections.

ModMoron

He is an idiot.
CA has been dominated by the state legislature, especially Willie Brown, for years. They are all Democrats. They have put in place some of the most "progressive" laws on the books--cap n trade, fuel emissions standards, workplace standards etc etc etc. All of this has caused a major outflow of businesses to AZ and other more friendly states.
To prove his stupidity, Juniorbert cites Ronald Reagan, who was governor long before he was born. Actually he was president long before he was born too, but that's another matter.
In those days CA was actually more conservative, and hosted the leading aerospace companies in the country. But of course things change in 30-some years.

Interestingly, the leftists here will do anything rather than debate the basic premise of the OP. There is no question states with more conservative governments-fewer programs, lower taxes--are in better fiscal shape than states with the opposite. The entire "they get lots of federal money" is a red herring. No one has shown that any of this money has made much difference to their budgets.

 

[Ravi]

Yep SAW your link buddy. You are completely ignoring the point I mentioned. That link is too overgeneralized to be useful. I really dont see the point of the link. Maybe you just dont understand what Im saying. INDIVIDUALS ... PAY ... TAXES ... TO... THE ... FEDERAL ... GOVERNMENT! Am I wrong here people? help me out. Ive been wrong before I'll admit that so if I am help me out.

Overgeneralization? Nope. These are states that a majority voted for Dubya in 2000. Many of them are your typical Republican states. These states, receive more money in federal funding than they give. You seem to not understand that. You want to break it down person to person, be my guest. However, as far as states go, Red states are the ones who feed from the trough.

It's like I said back on Page One though, you're going to have to find enough Conservatives first to do a study or do this. A majority of the so called Conservatives today are not Conservative at all.

Wow I really can't believe you dont understrand what Im saying. Why do you break it down to just what suits you. Why can't you break it down by county? or cities? Youre being intellectually dishonest.

In Florida, which is for all intents and purposes a red state, the South Florida area funds the rest of the state ... and South Florida is blue.

Modbert is correct.

I'd love to see your conservative utopia...oh wait, Saudi Arabia and Somalia already exist.

 

[editec]

We could divide a section of the country in half. One half of this section would govern by conservative ideals the other would govern using liberal philosophies. I wonder how each government would do. Is this possible? You would think that these days some computer simulations could be done to determine an outcome. What are some thoughts or ideas on this?

That would be neat.

Of course the only way to really do it is to set up each control group with exactly the same resources to begin with.

In fact why stop with just two groups?

Create a communist sector, a socialist sector, a Randian sector, an objectivist libertarian sector, a FASCIST sector and so forth.

That would be a very informative project.

It would have to go on for generations though, to really have merit.

 

[midcan5]

History has many examples of times when conservatives dominated culture and politics, the problem is if conservatism is tradition then how do you get out of the cave? Serious question. You cannot move forward if you stand still. Recently C has co-opted 18th century liberalism, but that doesn't make it conservative. No nation has ever been founded on conservatism because it is primarily reactionary. The best piece on conservative ideology is linked below. If you are interested in ideology and history check out books linked below.

The Rhetoric of Reaction - Albert O. Hirschman - Harvard University Press


[ame=http://www.amazon.com/Ideology-Very-Short-Introduction-Introductions/dp/019280281X/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8]Amazon.com: Ideology: A Very Short Introduction (Very Short Introductions) (9780192802811): Michael Freeden: Books[/ame]

[ame=http://www.amazon.com/Glory-Dream-Narrative-History-1932-1972/dp/0553345893/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8]Amazon.com: The Glory and the Dream: A Narrative History of…[/ame]

 

[The Rabbi]

We could divide a section of the country in half. One half of this section would govern by conservative ideals the other would govern using liberal philosophies. I wonder how each government would do. Is this possible? You would think that these days some computer simulations could be done to determine an outcome. What are some thoughts or ideas on this?

That would be neat.

Of course the only way to really do it is to set up each control group with exactly the same resources to begin with.

In fact why stop with just two groups?

Create a communist sector, a socialist sector, a Randian sector, an objectivist libertarian sector, a FASCIST sector and so forth.

That would be a very informative project.

It would have to go on for generations though, to really have merit.

We already have examples. E.Germany and W.Germany and N.Korea and S.Korea. The results have been decisive.

 

[Ravi]

We could divide a section of the country in half. One half of this section would govern by conservative ideals the other would govern using liberal philosophies. I wonder how each government would do. Is this possible? You would think that these days some computer simulations could be done to determine an outcome. What are some thoughts or ideas on this?

That would be neat.

Of course the only way to really do it is to set up each control group with exactly the same resources to begin with.

In fact why stop with just two groups?

Create a communist sector, a socialist sector, a Randian sector, an objectivist libertarian sector, a FASCIST sector and so forth.

That would be a very informative project.

It would have to go on for generations though, to really have merit.

We already have examples. E.Germany and W.Germany and N.Korea and S.Korea. The results have been decisive.

Not really. All those countries either had the backing of major players or were constantly attacked and undermined by major players.

In the OP's example we would have to institute a non-interference clause.

It's kind of seditious talking about this...don't you think? How sad that so many hate the form of government we currently have that was laid out in the constitution.

 

[editec]

We could divide a section of the country in half. One half of this section would govern by conservative ideals the other would govern using liberal philosophies. I wonder how each government would do. Is this possible? You would think that these days some computer simulations could be done to determine an outcome. What are some thoughts or ideas on this?

That would be neat.

Of course the only way to really do it is to set up each control group with exactly the same resources to begin with.

In fact why stop with just two groups?

Create a communist sector, a socialist sector, a Randian sector, an objectivist libertarian sector, a FASCIST sector and so forth.

That would be a very informative project.

It would have to go on for generations though, to really have merit.

We already have examples. E.Germany and W.Germany and N.Korea and S.Korea. The results have been decisive.

That looks good in reality.

But will it work on paper?

 

[Mr. Shaman]

The liberals wouldn't be happy with the conservatives governing themselves and would send a representative over to the conservative side on a daily basis to tell them how they should be doing things. They would also find some way to tax the conservatives.

Please.

The Librul-side would ca$h-in like BANDIT$!!!!

"conservatives" would constantly breach-the-Border (during the dark-o'-the-night), lookin' to loosin'-UP....much like the plantation-owners who raped female-slaves.

They'd come-over to kick-back, smoke some dope, listen to some music (other-than the National Anthem), and....in-general...cool-OUT, so they could go back to living (as is expected of them)....and, still maintain their sanity.

Never underestimate the profitability of hypocrisy.

(The DICK; Armey never has.)​

 

[rikules]

The liberals wouldn't be happy with the conservatives governing themselves and would send a representative over to the conservative side on a daily basis to tell them how they should be doing things. They would also find some way to tax the conservatives.

the conservatives wouldn't be able to sleep at night thinking about how all those liberals were "getting away" wit hbeing too liberal...

smoking pot, having sex
getting divorced
homosexuality
atheism
reasoning and thinking


and since the conservatives would have MOST of the weapons they wold form militia groups and invade GODLESS LIBERAL America and kill all the liberal men and rape all the liberal women

 

[The Rabbi]

That would be neat.

Of course the only way to really do it is to set up each control group with exactly the same resources to begin with.

In fact why stop with just two groups?

Create a communist sector, a socialist sector, a Randian sector, an objectivist libertarian sector, a FASCIST sector and so forth.

That would be a very informative project.

It would have to go on for generations though, to really have merit.

We already have examples. E.Germany and W.Germany and N.Korea and S.Korea. The results have been decisive.

That looks good in reality.

But will it work on paper?

That's exactly what the French general asked the NATO commander in Yugoslavia.

 

[topspin]

I'm going back to Cali, so you know where I am on this issue.

Who has the most millionaires and highest real estate prices? Cali

One more Rastafari coming to Napa!!

 

[editec]

Here's thought...

Consider that pretty much every system works more or less, if every player in it is pulling in the same direction?

Some systems will work better than others though, of that I am no less certain than those of you who insist that only one system really works.

It occurs to me that this experiment needs to be totally isolated from our world, but that each different system ought to be able to trade with every other group in that experiment, too.

What I think we would see is that eventually those systems would begin to modify their behaviors to look more and more alike over time.

They'd probably never admit it, but they'd start taking on some aspects of the other system that they claim to dispise.

Why?

Becuase the theoetical systems some of you folks subscibe to, won't work well enough, that's why.

Did you know that Mao allowed capitalism during the famon of 48-49?

Wanna know why?

Because he realized that it worked BETTER than his collectivist model, that's why.

Of course once that crises past he went back to his idiological stance.

Fucking idologues...they're menace to mankind no matter what their belief system.