People live longer in blue states than red; new study points to impact-state policies

cawacko said:
Have you ever been to California? We have the most wealth, highest poverty rate and a middle class that has been leaving for years. It is not spread out evenly throughout the state. Nothing even close to that.
Click to expand...

One state. Literally one state. Like I said, California is the exception to the rule.
 
StoneByStone said:
One state. Literally one state. Like I said, California is the exception to the rule.
Click to expand...

Feel free to show data that California is the exception to the rule as far as inequality within each state as I’d be interested in seeing it
 
Last edited:
cawacko said:
Feel free to show data that California is the exception to the rule as far as inequality within each state as I’d be interested in seeing it
Click to expand...

Look up legit any article on living standards, human development index, or economic security. The blue states, on average, do better than the red states.
 
cawacko said:
You realize the top of the list is the highest inequality correct?
Click to expand...

Yes, I'm going by the overall number of states. On average, the blue states are doing better.

And really, is this surprising? Look at countries around the world. Would you rather live under right-wing economies like Saudi Arabia or left-wing economies like Switzerland?
 
StoneByStone said:
Yes, I'm going by the overall number of states. On average, the blue states are doing better.

And really, is this surprising? Look at countries around the world. Would you rather live under right-wing economies like Saudi Arabia or left-wing economies like Switzerland?
Click to expand...

Now you've moved multiple goal posts. You started with saying Cali was the exception to the rule and that was shown to be false. So you turn to global economies? Saudi Arabia is an oil based economy with massive welfare benefits given to its citizens, many of whom work for the government, and that's right wing? And Sweden which is market based economy (with generous welfare benefits) is left wing? Do you just make this stuff up?
 
cawacko said:
Now you've moved multiple goal posts. You started with saying Cali was the exception to the rule and that was shown to be false.
Click to expand...

In the studies I've seen, California was the one exception. From what you've shown me, there are a few exceptions, but blue states still (on average) do better than red states. That's not moving multiple goalposts since my original point was that blue states do better.

So you turn to global economies? Saudi Arabia is an oil based economy with massive welfare benefits given to its citizens, many of whom work for the government, and that's right wing? And Sweden which is market based economy (with generous welfare benefits) is left wing? Do you just make this stuff up?
Click to expand...

I brought up global economics to show that it's not just within America that this happens. It's the same thing when we're talking about the differences between countries.

Serious question, do you know the historical definitions of right-wing and left-wing?
 
StoneByStone said:
In the studies I've seen, California was the one exception. From what you've shown me, there are a few exceptions, but blue states still (on average) do better than red states. That's not moving multiple goalposts since my original point was that blue states do better.



I brought up global economics to show that it's not just within America that this happens. It's the same thing when we're talking about the differences between countries.

Serious question, do you know the historical definitions of right-wing and left-wing?
Click to expand...

What are the wealthiest states that are blue? Cali, New York, Connecticut, Mass, Illinois and New Jersey. All at the top of the list for inequality. So don’t tell me blue states somehow have this great distribution of wealth.

As for how to define right and left wing

Right wing = free(er) markets (market economies)
Left wing = more command economies
 
cawacko said:
What are the wealthiest states that are blue? Cali, New York, Connecticut, Mass, Illinois and New Jersey. All at the top of the list for inequality. So don’t tell me blue states somehow have this great distribution of wealth.
Click to expand...

If you're going to limit it that way, sure. If you're going to look at all of the states, then blue states tend to have less inequality.
Though I also think that overall living standards are more important than any one thing. Being poor in a state that has generous social programs isn't as bad as being in a state that doesn't.
https://www.homesnacks.net/these-are-the-10-best-states-to-live-in-america-123067/

As for how to define right and left wing

Right wing = free(er) markets (market economies)
Left wing = more command economies
Click to expand...

So that's incorrect. The Left vs Right divide goes back to the French Revolution. The Left wanted Democracy and a redistribution of power spread more evenly. The Right wanted power to remain in the hands of the Aristocracy. When it became clear that Democracy was the new law of the land, the Right decided that they could use Capitalism and Christianity to keep power in a hierarchical structure. The Right is not about free markets, it's about strict hierarchy. From Edmund Burke to Ayn Rand to Jordan Peterson, it's always about hierarchy.
This is why the Right has been opposed to any social movement that redistributes wealth and power in any way. It's also why government grows bigger under Republicans. It's not about small government, never was.

So with all that being said, a country like Saudi Arabia is right-wing, both in terms of culture and economics. A country like Switzerland is left-wing.
Notice how the most culturally liberal countries also just happen to have smaller government.
 
StoneByStone said:
If you're going to limit it that way, sure. If you're going to look at all of the states, then blue states tend to have less inequality.
Though I also think that overall living standards are more important than any one thing. Being poor in a state that has generous social programs isn't as bad as being in a state that doesn't.
https://www.homesnacks.net/these-are-the-10-best-states-to-live-in-america-123067/



So that's incorrect. The Left vs Right divide goes back to the French Revolution. The Left wanted Democracy and a redistribution of power spread more evenly. The Right wanted power to remain in the hands of the Aristocracy. When it became clear that Democracy was the new law of the land, the Right decided that they could use Capitalism and Christianity to keep power in a hierarchical structure. The Right is not about free markets, it's about strict hierarchy. From Edmund Burke to Ayn Rand to Jordan Peterson, it's always about hierarchy.
This is why the Right has been opposed to any social movement that redistributes wealth and power in any way. It's also why government grows bigger under Republicans. It's not about small government, never was.

So with all that being said, a country like Saudi Arabia is right-wing, both in terms of culture and economics. A country like Switzerland is left-wing.
Notice how the most culturally liberal countries also just happen to have smaller government.
Click to expand...

I forgot, you’re a racial separatist socialist millennial and thus don’t have memories of the lefts support for command economies such as the Soviet Union and Cuba. And since they were shown to be total failures folks such as yourself act like that was inevitable instead of the future as it was often called at the time (and you see older Democratic politicians having to walk back their support for Castro) Capitalism is better than any other system conceived for generating rising living standards, innovation and personal freedom. Yes capitalism has flaws, no denying that, but the above sentence is true. That’s right wing, or classic liberalism, economics.
 
cawacko said:
I forgot, you’re a racial separatist socialist millennial and thus don’t have memories of the lefts support for command economies such as the Soviet Union and Cuba.
Click to expand...

Nope. The Left never supported the Soviet Union. During the Russian Provisional Government, the Left voted for a Liberal Democracy. The Bolsheviks, being typical right-wing Fascists, used force to take over and create a Fascist government. And did the Bolsheviks create collective ownership like the Marxists wanted? No, instead they created State Capitalism which was more similar to economies that Fascists had in Germany, Italy, Austria, and Spain.
As for the Cuban Revolution, there are two important things to consider. First, Cuba already had a dictatorship. If Democracy had been an option, the Left would have chosen that, but it wasn't. There was no chance at a vote, like in Russia, so the Left was forced to choose between two Dictators. They chose the less shitty one.
Secondly, the Revolution happened during the Cold War, which is why Cuba needed to be Authoritarian. They're an island country next to the American Empire in a time when America was the aggressor. Russia and China have no excuse, but I totally understand why Cuba needed a government like this.

Capitalism is better than any other system conceived for generating rising living standards, innovation and personal freedom. Yes capitalism has flaws, no denying that, but the above sentence is true. That’s right wing, or classic liberalism, economics.
Click to expand...

So why do countries with Social Democracy do better than America and other countries with Capitalism?
And why are countries like the Soviet Union and Maoist China considered Socialist when they did not have collective ownership?
 
StoneByStone said:
Look up legit any article on living standards, human development index, or economic security. The blue states, on average, do better than the red states.
Click to expand...

Except California...

While California’s economy outperforms the nation’s, its level of income inequality exceeds that of all but five states. Families at the top of the income distribution in California have 12.3 times the income of families at the bottom ($262,000 versus $21,000, for the 90th and 10th percentiles, respectively, in 2018), measured before taxes and safety net programs. The disparity is present throughout the state. Current government policies substantially narrow the gap between rich and poor.
Click to expand...

https://www.ppic.org/publication/income-inequality-in-california/

California is the golden state — at least for those at the top of the income scale. For everyone else, the nickname may apply more to the sun than to money.

That’s one takeaway of an analysis of U.S.Census Bureau data by the California Budget and Policy Center (CBPC), which found a widening gap between the state’s haves and have-nots.
Click to expand...

https://calmatters.org/california-d...in-some-counties-the-disparities-are-extreme/

Or New York...

Regarding New York, the report’s key findings include:

The top 1 percent earned 45 times more than the bottom 99 percent in New York, the greatest disparity of any state. Connecticut ranked second with a top-to-bottom ratio of nearly 43. Wyoming was third, followed by Nevada and Florida. (Table 1)
The average annual income of the top 1 percent was $2 million (Table 1), and New York’s richest 1/100 of top 1% (“the 1% of the 1%”) had average incomes of $61.6 million, second to Connecticut’s $69.5 million. (Table 4)
Within New York State, only two counties—New York (Manhattan) and Westchester—have greater top-to-bottom income ratios than the state overall. In Manhattan, the average income of the top 1% ($8.1 million) was 116 times that of the 99% ($70,500), while in Westchester County, the average income of the top 1% ($4.3 million) was 54 times that of the 99% ($80,300).
High levels of income polarization are not limited to downstate New York. The third most income-polarized county was Saratoga, north of Albany, where the $1.8 million average income for the top 1% was 35 times that of the $51,500 average income for the 99%.
A three decade-long era of shared prosperity came to an end in 1979 when the 1%’s income share started to rise dramatically in New York and in every state in the United States. Since 1979, the average incomes of the top 1% have grown by 272% in inflation-adjusted terms in New York, while the average incomes of the 99% rose a meager 5.4%.
Click to expand...

http://fiscalpolicy.org/nys-leads-nation-in-income-inequality

Basically in Blue states there is the greatest amount of income inequality and unfairness in social and economic justice there is in the US. So much for Progressives delivering on their ideas...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top