View Single Post
Unread May 16th, 2005, 12:24 PM
TomJrzk TomJrzk is offline
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Dallas
Posts: 257
Thumbs up Re: Red vs. blue explained by white birth rate & Darwinian rational

Originally Posted by Lizzie Pickard
This is going nowhere, and you're getting condescending. Farewell.
Thank You Lizzie, I've been tempted to write something to this effect for a LONG time. But, Fred does have interesting points and adds a lot of info to this site despite how much I disagree with his tactics. I'm glad that you offered Todd a brief rest.

There must be something in the fashion world that I wouldn't have guessed; my wife is also an Atheist and got a Bachelor's in fashion! Whoda guessed!?!?!

You said so many things I agreed with that I have only one to pick on: I believe that it's beyond perilous to assign causes to effects. To illustrate what I mean, I WON'T defend this 'cause' but offer it as an alternative to what you've assigned as a cause (smarter, more successful populations) to the red vs blue federal receipts: perhaps those blue states have the majority of the 'best' places to live (I'd rather be in ANY of the top 10 paying states than ANY of the top 10 takers, and I suspect that you would too), the 'best' places have the highest costs of living, require the highest salaries, and pay the most income tax. These most comfortable places to live also attract the most indigents who vote in Democrats who take from the rich and give to the poor.
Reply With Quote