1) Lock them up! They have been shady ever since the sun rose over Arkansas.
2) Get rid of the crazies in the Democratic party like Franken
3) Give voters a real choice
I provide the history lesson because arrogant Silicon Valley types, for all their education and supposed intelligence, have no grasp of context.When you have to go all the way back to the civil war, and beyond, to the geological evolution of the planet, to excuse why the southern states are doing so poorly, then you have a problem. I'll grant that you can find a deterministic causal sequence traceable backwards in time to the formation of the universe to explain why any given thing is the way it currently is. But we're getting far afield of the context of this discussion.
The context is this. People on the left bring up the fact that blue states pay the majority of taxes while red states take the majority of services for two related reasons. First, because conservatives incessantly complain about paying taxes which then get spent by the government to benefit the less fortunate. This is tough for liberals to swallow when it's the blue states paying the majority of the taxes while the red states are getting most of the benefits. Liberals don't mind the idea of this at all. In fact, we support it in concept. But when the primary beneficiaries of it do nothing but complain about the idea of this wealth transference, do not expect liberals to sit quiet and not bother to point out the irony and the hypocrisy.
Second, because of the cultural animus that conservatives have toward blue states, you often hear them saying things like they wish California would secede and leave the country. These fools appear to have no idea that 15% of the nation's food supply, including almost half the fruits, vegetables and dairy is grown here, and that the most rapidly expanding US industry, IT, has its nexus here, and it benefits the entire country. The US is starting to lag technologically behind countries like China precisely because modern conservatives oppose using tax dollars the way the Chinese do to maintain our technological edge. But at least we have Silicon Valley, in spite of conservatives, not because of them. Perhaps conservatives shouldn't be maligning something which is such a tremendous benefit to all of us, including them.
The simple fact is that, no matter the distant historical reasons, red states need blue states a lot more than blue states need red states. Perhaps we wouldn't feel the need to rub their noses in this if they didn't hate us so much.
I provide the history lesson because arrogant Silicon Valley types, for all their education and supposed intelligence, have no grasp of context.
America would be a far better place if we got rid of or significantly curtailed Wall Street and Silicon Valley, as those are the two economic engines destroying the jobs that are the driving force of red state animus towards blue states. Maybe the people in red states aspire to more than being fiefdoms of blue states. You can't destroy the very thing that give people meaning and purpose and then be surprised that they express animus towards your arrogant and misguided sense of charity.
What value does Silicon Valley create? Sure, investors are throwing money at it, but that's what tends to happen with bubbles. Social media, which is causing unprecented intrusions of privacy and is the platform through which foreign agents manipulate our elections. Disruption, which is just a fancy word for irresponsibility. Do I really need a drone to deliver a product to my door?
Elon Musk is the only American entrepeneur making anything of value.
How about Wall Street? Developing new and exciting ways to manipulate and move money around.
China will surpass us because they actually make tangible things of value.
And you continue to ignore the fact that California would not be making much of anything were it not for significant federal investments.So now we’ve gone from being mad at California because the rest of the country is propping up its cost of living to being mad at California because the rest of the country is dominated by it. What?? Which one is it?
You need to face hard facts. California is wealthy because it makes things people want. Its economy is powerful and highly competitive. This is not true of a lot of the red states that California donates money to. If red states are mad because they can’t keep up that’s their problem, not the problem of New York and CA. The answer isn’t to bring successful states down, it’s to pull unsuccessful ones up, which is why CA and NY donate so much money to others. It would just be nice if the recipients of those donations would be grateful instead of hostile.
And you continue to ignore the fact that California would not be making much of anything were it not for significant federal investments.
Take agriculture. It doesn't make any sense to grow crops in a high cost place like California. BUT, when you have a highly exploitable migrant population willing to work for pennies, suddenly that model becomes economically feasible.
Apple's success is due to their exploiting labor in China and protecting profits in offshore tax havens. Nothing admirable about that model.
What value do Google, Facebook, Amazon and Twitter actually provide? All I see are technology monopolies, not unlike the industrial ones that preceeded them.
As I said, you can't expect people to be grateful for the scraps from your table when you've incapacitated their ability to provide for themselves.
Data please. Per capita over what time horizon and under what investment context?And yet plenty of other states have in total received significantly larger per capita federal investment. Why can’t they compete?
You need low cost people and water to grow crops. California possesses neither. Take away federal investments in water management and lax federal immigration enforcement, and California isn't growing much of anything.It makes a lot of sense to grow things there as it has one of the longest growing seasons in the world and the areas where agriculture happens in California aren’t particularly high cost.
Kansas is a land locked state with no considerable natural resources to drive the formation of economic centers. Despite that considerable economic disadvantage, Wichita emerged as a manufacturing hub. With the decline of manufacturing so too went much of the rust belt and dust bowl. Unsurprising, these same people went for Trump's populist message.Nothing stopped say, Kansas from developing the iPhone and building it in China.
It's an innovation without regulation or controls, and is causing more harm than goodGoogle has effectively indexed human knowledge in a way that was inconceivable even twenty years ago. The ability to rapidly find the information you need with a few keystrokes is a colossal innovation that has become so seamless we all take it for granted.
Actually the red states are catching on. South Carolina and Missouri are drawing considerable aerospace engineering work and jobs from SoCal and SeattleNothing has incapacitated conservative areas from being able to compete, they are simply unwilling to reshape their governance model to become more competitive.
My rationale has been consistent. You are attempting to reframe it. You failed.I can’t help but note that your argument has changed from California being propped up by the rest of the country to the rest of the country begging for California’s scraps. To me that shifting rationale indicates just a general grievance against the successful areas of the country.
Data please. Per capita over what time horizon and under what investment context?
You need low cost people and water to grow crops. California possesses neither. Take away federal investments in water management and lax federal immigration enforcement, and California isn't growing much of anything.
Kansas is a land locked state with no considerable natural resources to drive the formation of economic centers. Despite that considerable economic disadvantage, Wichita emerged as a manufacturing hub. With the decline of manufacturing so too went much of the rust belt and dust bowl. Unsurprising, these same people went for Trump's populist message.
Also, states don't develop products, companies do. It just so happens that Silicon Valley, not Kansas, is where the federal government located the research centers and investments that lay the foundation for the tech industry.
What did California specifically do to build Silicon Valley? What did NY specifically do to create Wall Street? Neither of those things were state driven.
It's an innovation without regulation or controls, and is causing more harm than good
Actually the red states are catching on. South Carolina and Missouri are drawing considerable aerospace engineering work and jobs from SoCal and Seattle
My rationale has been consistent. You are attempting to reframe it. You failed.
1) Lock them up! They have been shady ever since the sun rose over Arkansas.
2) Get rid of the crazies in the Democratic party like Franken
3) Give voters a real choice
Haha, "what value does Google provide?"And you continue to ignore the fact that California would not be making much of anything were it not for significant federal investments.
Take agriculture. It doesn't make any sense to grow crops in a high cost place like California. BUT, when you have a highly exploitable migrant population willing to work for pennies, suddenly that model becomes economically feasible.
Apple's success is due to their exploiting labor in China and protecting profits in offshore tax havens. Nothing admirable about that model.
What value do Google, Facebook, Amazon and Twitter actually provide? All I see are technology monopolies, not unlike the industrial ones that preceeded them.
As I said, you can't expect people to be grateful for the scraps from your table when you've incapacitated their ability to provide for themselves.
Haha, "what value does Google provide?"
It puts information about anything at our fingertips for most of us and provides retards like you endless amounts of fake information so you can remain in your bubble.
Please, by all means, lay out how it was rigged and we can ignore how they supposedly affected the race for now.Suck a dick... That's an impossible question to answer. I can lay out how it was rigged, but I can't go back and recalculate how each of those things affected the race. No one could do that... Not even your imaginary sky daddy.
Non progressive policies.... They're basically voting for Moderate Republican to Right wing Republican policies. Leaning towards the moderate republican side isn't progressive.
Go read her speeches... Her real position, not the public one.
Good deflection from the fact that you were wrong.
I bet a bitcoin.
Huh!? They don't care who wins as long as they're on their side, which they ensure by giving them asinine sums of money.
Your ignorance of how modern politics work is astounding!
No, it provides insurance, not healthcare. Again, you didn't address any of the issues with the ACA.
The ACA shifts the burden cost onto young adults.
There are millions of people forced to buy outrageously expensive insurance, but still can't go to the doctor, because of the overwhelming deductibles and copays.
Millions of people didn't get medicaid expansion.
These people are paying for your cancer treatments, and being fucked by Uncle Sam.
This is privatized taxation!
I assume you have proof of that claim.Google altered search results so that negative stories were less likely to pop up for HRC.
Also, google is becoming a terrible search engine.
DuckDuckGo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xd_yzouiXX8I assume you have proof of that claim.
Suck a dick... That's an impossible question to answer. I can lay out how it was rigged, but I can't go back and recalculate how each of those things affected the race. No one could do that... Not even your imaginary sky daddy.
Non progressive policies.... They're basically voting for Moderate Republican to Right wing Republican policies. Leaning towards the moderate republican side isn't progressive.
Go read her speeches... Her real position, not the public one.
Good deflection from the fact that you were wrong.
I bet a bitcoin.
Huh!? They don't care who wins as long as they're on their side, which they ensure by giving them asinine sums of money.
Your ignorance of how modern politics work is astounding!
No, it provides insurance, not healthcare. Again, you didn't address any of the issues with the ACA.
The ACA shifts the burden cost onto young adults.
There are millions of people forced to buy outrageously expensive insurance, but still can't go to the doctor, because of the overwhelming deductibles and copays.
Millions of people didn't get medicaid expansion.
These people are paying for your cancer treatments, and being fucked by Uncle Sam.
This is privatized taxation!
Napolitano accused America's most popular search engine, Google, of scrubbing search suggestions in favor of Clinton. Although it is clear Google’s algorithm is different from Bing or Yahoo, it still isn’t correct to describe the difference as evidence of Google’s support of Clinton.
Google’s suggested searches, for the most part, avoid offensive suggestions for everyone, not just Clinton.
Sputnik
(Russian pronunciation: [ˈsputnʲɪk]; formerly The Voice of Russia and RIA Novosti) is a news agency, news websites and radio broadcast service established by the Russian government-controlled news agency Rossiya Segodnya.[2] Headquartered in Moscow, Sputnik has regional editorial offices in Washington, Cairo, Beijing, London and Edinburgh; in Sputnik's Washington D.C. office, Peter Martinichev is the editor and Mikhail Safronov is the bureau chief.[3] Sputnik focuses on global politics and economics and is geared towards a non-Russian audience.[4] According to The New York Times, Sputnik engages in bias and disinformation,[5] and has been described by Foreign Policy magazine and the Centre for European Policy Analysis as being a Russian propaganda outlet.[6][7]
It's TYT video. TYT is far more credible than anything you see on TV. Did you even watch the video!? The evidence is overwhelming!lol, of course it's a youtube video. Let's look at an actually objective source:
http://www.politifact.com/punditfac...ogle-adjust-its-autocomplete-algorithm-hide-/
Sputnik is literally Russian government run propaganda. It is hilarious that you complain about other people reading biased 'news' and then link to a website deliberately made by the Russian government to spread propaganda.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sputnik_(news_agency)
I disagree, that makes it a subjective issue. These are the same things being said before he was elected. You guys get too wrapped up in the polls but ignore things like yard signs and social media following. You're using 19th century tools for a 20th century job, this skews your view.
It's TYT video. TYT is far more reputable than anything you see on TV.
No, it's not... Enough Russiagate bullshit.
I like how you simply ignored the actual objective source and just said the same thing again.
Is Sputnik News run by the Russian government? Yes or no?
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL you post this yet discount the drumpf/russia collusion.Google altered search results so that negative stories were less likely to pop up for HRC.
Also, google is becoming a terrible search engine. Way too many filters.
DuckDuckGo
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL you post this yet discount the drumpf/russia collusion.
HI
LARRY
US
Why should anyone bother? You're either a troll or an idiot: either way, it's a waste of everyone's time to argue with you and present evidence as you'll never be convinced. It can be seen right here in this very thread, where you deflect, ignore, and shift goal posts every time evidence is posted which runs contrary to the reality you have constructed.So, maybe you have the evidence for this then!? The others couldn't come up with anything.