Discussion:
The Democratic Party Has Become the Black People's Party
(too old to reply)
mg
2017-03-01 02:12:08 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
The Democratic party has morphed into the black people's party and
the Republican party has become the white people's party.

Here's a summary of the election results:

"Whites vs. nonwhite voters

Whites made up 70 percent of voters
58 percent of all whites voted for Trump
21 percent of nonwhites voted for Trump

White men

White men made up 34 percent of voters
63 percent of them voted Trump
31 percent voted Clinton

White women

White women made up 37 percent of voters
53 percent of them voted Trump
43 percent voted Clinton

Young whites (ages 18-29)

Young white people made up 12 percent of voters
48 percent of them voted Trump
43 percent voted Clinton
In comparison, 9 percent of young blacks and 24 percent of young
Latinos voted for Trump.

College-educated whites

White college graduates made up 37 percent of voters
49 percent of them voted for Trump, while 45 percent voted for
Clinton.
54 percent of college-educated white men voted Trump.
45 percent of college-educated white women chose Trump, while 51
percent chose Clinton. This is the only white demographic tracked by
the exit poll that Trump didn’t win.

Non-college-educated whites

Whites without a college degree made up 34 percent of voters
67 percent of them voted for Trump
Of the women in this group, 62 percent voted for Trump
And men voted 72 percent for Trump
Data for white women 18-29 and white men 18-29 weren’t reported."

https://news.vice.com/story/white-people-voted-to-elect-donald-trump
wolfbat359
2017-03-01 15:08:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by mg
The Democratic party has morphed into the black people's party and
the Republican party has become the white people's party.
"Whites vs. nonwhite voters
Whites made up 70 percent of voters
58 percent of all whites voted for Trump
21 percent of nonwhites voted for Trump
White men
White men made up 34 percent of voters
63 percent of them voted Trump
31 percent voted Clinton
White women
White women made up 37 percent of voters
53 percent of them voted Trump
43 percent voted Clinton
Young whites (ages 18-29)
Young white people made up 12 percent of voters
48 percent of them voted Trump
43 percent voted Clinton
In comparison, 9 percent of young blacks and 24 percent of young
Latinos voted for Trump.
College-educated whites
White college graduates made up 37 percent of voters
49 percent of them voted for Trump, while 45 percent voted for
Clinton.
54 percent of college-educated white men voted Trump.
45 percent of college-educated white women chose Trump, while 51
percent chose Clinton. This is the only white demographic tracked by
the exit poll that Trump didn’t win.
Non-college-educated whites
Whites without a college degree made up 34 percent of voters
67 percent of them voted for Trump
Of the women in this group, 62 percent voted for Trump
And men voted 72 percent for Trump
Data for white women 18-29 and white men 18-29 weren’t reported."
https://news.vice.com/story/white-people-voted-to-elect-donald-trump
Then how come she got some where around 3 million more votes than Trump???
JackPineSavage
2017-03-01 15:28:44 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by wolfbat359
Post by mg
The Democratic party has morphed into the black people's party and
the Republican party has become the white people's party.
"Whites vs. nonwhite voters
Whites made up 70 percent of voters
58 percent of all whites voted for Trump
21 percent of nonwhites voted for Trump
White men
White men made up 34 percent of voters
63 percent of them voted Trump
31 percent voted Clinton
White women
White women made up 37 percent of voters
53 percent of them voted Trump
43 percent voted Clinton
Young whites (ages 18-29)
Young white people made up 12 percent of voters
48 percent of them voted Trump
43 percent voted Clinton
In comparison, 9 percent of young blacks and 24 percent of young
Latinos voted for Trump.
College-educated whites
White college graduates made up 37 percent of voters
49 percent of them voted for Trump, while 45 percent voted for
Clinton.
54 percent of college-educated white men voted Trump.
45 percent of college-educated white women chose Trump, while 51
percent chose Clinton. This is the only white demographic tracked by
the exit poll that Trump didn’t win.
Non-college-educated whites
Whites without a college degree made up 34 percent of voters
67 percent of them voted for Trump
Of the women in this group, 62 percent voted for Trump
And men voted 72 percent for Trump
Data for white women 18-29 and white men 18-29 weren’t reported."
https://news.vice.com/story/white-people-voted-to-elect-donald-trump
Then how come she got some where around 3 million more votes than Trump???
One word - California.
rumpelstiltskin
2017-03-01 20:01:12 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
<snip>
Post by JackPineSavage
Post by wolfbat359
Then how come she got some where around 3 million more votes than Trump???
One word - California.
That's why California needs to be a separate country.
We don't have enough in common with much of the
rest of the USA, particularly the Bible Belt.
islander
2017-03-02 01:57:33 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by rumpelstiltskin
<snip>
Post by JackPineSavage
Post by wolfbat359
Then how come she got some where around 3 million more votes than Trump???
One word - California.
That's why California needs to be a separate country.
We don't have enough in common with much of the
rest of the USA, particularly the Bible Belt.
Perhaps we could make a split like the British did for India in 1947
when it formed Pakistan as an eastern part and a western part. Oh Yea,
that turned out to be a not very good idea!
rumpelstiltskin
2017-03-02 03:40:03 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
<snip>
Post by JackPineSavage
Post by wolfbat359
Then how come she got some where around 3 million more votes than Trump???
One word - California.
That's why California needs to be a separate country.
We don't have enough in common with much of the
rest of the USA, particularly the Bible Belt.
Perhaps we could make a split like the British did for India in 1947
when it formed Pakistan as an eastern part and a western part. Oh Yea,
that turned out to be a not very good idea!
I think California is different from India Pakistan.
For one thing, the loonies are mostly in the part
that's not California, whereas in the India-Pakistan
split, the loonies were mostly in the smaller Pakistan.

I really would like a long vacation from loonies
in and influencing politics. Just not having my flesh
crawl periodically whenever I see Mitch McConnel's
mug on TV would make it worth it. I mean nasty
loonies that is - we have loonies in California too
of course, but except for a few up in the mountains,
they're not as ugly-minded.

Gandhi was really upset by the India/Pakistan
split, BTW. It was all "India" to him.
mg
2017-03-02 16:59:57 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
<snip>
Post by JackPineSavage
Post by wolfbat359
Then how come she got some where around 3 million more votes than Trump???
One word - California.
That's why California needs to be a separate country.
We don't have enough in common with much of the
rest of the USA, particularly the Bible Belt.
Perhaps we could make a split like the British did for India in 1947
when it formed Pakistan as an eastern part and a western part. Oh Yea,
that turned out to be a not very good idea!
I think California is different from India Pakistan.
For one thing, the loonies are mostly in the part
that's not California, whereas in the India-Pakistan
split, the loonies were mostly in the smaller Pakistan.
I really would like a long vacation from loonies
in and influencing politics. Just not having my flesh
crawl periodically whenever I see Mitch McConnel's
mug on TV would make it worth it. I mean nasty
loonies that is - we have loonies in California too
of course, but except for a few up in the mountains,
they're not as ugly-minded.
Gandhi was really upset by the India/Pakistan
split, BTW. It was all "India" to him.
I've recently become a fan of breaking up the U.S. into smaller
parts. I'm sure that's still a minority opinion, though. :-)
islander
2017-03-03 16:31:05 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
<snip>
Post by JackPineSavage
Post by wolfbat359
Then how come she got some where around 3 million more votes than Trump???
One word - California.
That's why California needs to be a separate country.
We don't have enough in common with much of the
rest of the USA, particularly the Bible Belt.
Perhaps we could make a split like the British did for India in 1947
when it formed Pakistan as an eastern part and a western part. Oh Yea,
that turned out to be a not very good idea!
I think California is different from India Pakistan.
For one thing, the loonies are mostly in the part
that's not California, whereas in the India-Pakistan
split, the loonies were mostly in the smaller Pakistan.
I really would like a long vacation from loonies
in and influencing politics. Just not having my flesh
crawl periodically whenever I see Mitch McConnel's
mug on TV would make it worth it. I mean nasty
loonies that is - we have loonies in California too
of course, but except for a few up in the mountains,
they're not as ugly-minded.
Gandhi was really upset by the India/Pakistan
split, BTW. It was all "India" to him.
Yea, a long vacation from the loonies would be luxurious!

I've been occupying myself lately with an update on my "50 experiments
in democracy" project which was a nerdy look at the measurable results
of governance in all 50 states. The previous work focused on 2008, or
as close as I could get data prior to the Great Recession. I'm now
focusing on 2015, when the Great Recession was essentially over. While
conservative governance in the 50 states has increased, the benefits to
the public have declined, at least in the data that I've compiled so far.
rumpelstiltskin
2017-03-03 20:21:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
<snip>
Post by JackPineSavage
Post by wolfbat359
Then how come she got some where around 3 million more votes than Trump???
One word - California.
That's why California needs to be a separate country.
We don't have enough in common with much of the
rest of the USA, particularly the Bible Belt.
Perhaps we could make a split like the British did for India in 1947
when it formed Pakistan as an eastern part and a western part. Oh Yea,
that turned out to be a not very good idea!
I think California is different from India Pakistan.
For one thing, the loonies are mostly in the part
that's not California, whereas in the India-Pakistan
split, the loonies were mostly in the smaller Pakistan.
I really would like a long vacation from loonies
in and influencing politics. Just not having my flesh
crawl periodically whenever I see Mitch McConnel's
mug on TV would make it worth it. I mean nasty
loonies that is - we have loonies in California too
of course, but except for a few up in the mountains,
they're not as ugly-minded.
Gandhi was really upset by the India/Pakistan
split, BTW. It was all "India" to him.
Yea, a long vacation from the loonies would be luxurious!
I've been occupying myself lately with an update on my "50 experiments
in democracy" project which was a nerdy look at the measurable results
of governance in all 50 states. The previous work focused on 2008, or
as close as I could get data prior to the Great Recession. I'm now
focusing on 2015, when the Great Recession was essentially over. While
conservative governance in the 50 states has increased, the benefits to
the public have declined, at least in the data that I've compiled so far.
I divested about 2/3 of my interests in the market in
December, and since then the market has shot up, of
course. I didn't lose much by that though, and in fact
the higher the market goes the antsier I get that I
should get out now, before the big bad wolf (I don't
mean Russia!!!) shows up to blow the house down.
Laziness is my reason for not getting completely out
of the market yet. Laziness is the reason I do or
don't do most things. I guess it's the prime mover
of my life.
El Castor
2017-03-03 20:23:03 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
<snip>
Post by JackPineSavage
Post by wolfbat359
Then how come she got some where around 3 million more votes than Trump???
One word - California.
That's why California needs to be a separate country.
We don't have enough in common with much of the
rest of the USA, particularly the Bible Belt.
Perhaps we could make a split like the British did for India in 1947
when it formed Pakistan as an eastern part and a western part. Oh Yea,
that turned out to be a not very good idea!
I think California is different from India Pakistan.
For one thing, the loonies are mostly in the part
that's not California, whereas in the India-Pakistan
split, the loonies were mostly in the smaller Pakistan.
I really would like a long vacation from loonies
in and influencing politics. Just not having my flesh
crawl periodically whenever I see Mitch McConnel's
mug on TV would make it worth it. I mean nasty
loonies that is - we have loonies in California too
of course, but except for a few up in the mountains,
they're not as ugly-minded.
Gandhi was really upset by the India/Pakistan
split, BTW. It was all "India" to him.
Yea, a long vacation from the loonies would be luxurious!
I've been occupying myself lately with an update on my "50 experiments
in democracy" project which was a nerdy look at the measurable results
of governance in all 50 states. The previous work focused on 2008, or
as close as I could get data prior to the Great Recession. I'm now
focusing on 2015, when the Great Recession was essentially over. While
conservative governance in the 50 states has increased, the benefits to
the public have declined, at least in the data that I've compiled so far.
We both know that your choice and treatment of data will be influenced
by your desired result -- a result which is a foregone conclusion, so
why bother?
islander
2017-03-04 01:49:48 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
<snip>
Post by JackPineSavage
Post by wolfbat359
Then how come she got some where around 3 million more votes than Trump???
One word - California.
That's why California needs to be a separate country.
We don't have enough in common with much of the
rest of the USA, particularly the Bible Belt.
Perhaps we could make a split like the British did for India in 1947
when it formed Pakistan as an eastern part and a western part. Oh Yea,
that turned out to be a not very good idea!
I think California is different from India Pakistan.
For one thing, the loonies are mostly in the part
that's not California, whereas in the India-Pakistan
split, the loonies were mostly in the smaller Pakistan.
I really would like a long vacation from loonies
in and influencing politics. Just not having my flesh
crawl periodically whenever I see Mitch McConnel's
mug on TV would make it worth it. I mean nasty
loonies that is - we have loonies in California too
of course, but except for a few up in the mountains,
they're not as ugly-minded.
Gandhi was really upset by the India/Pakistan
split, BTW. It was all "India" to him.
Yea, a long vacation from the loonies would be luxurious!
I've been occupying myself lately with an update on my "50 experiments
in democracy" project which was a nerdy look at the measurable results
of governance in all 50 states. The previous work focused on 2008, or
as close as I could get data prior to the Great Recession. I'm now
focusing on 2015, when the Great Recession was essentially over. While
conservative governance in the 50 states has increased, the benefits to
the public have declined, at least in the data that I've compiled so far.
We both know that your choice and treatment of data will be influenced
by your desired result -- a result which is a foregone conclusion, so
why bother?
"I often say that when you can measure what you are speaking about,
and express it in numbers, you know something about it; but when you
cannot measure it, when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge
is of a meagre and unsatisfactory kind." ...Lord Kelvin
rumpelstiltskin
2017-03-04 03:33:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
<snip>
Post by JackPineSavage
Post by wolfbat359
Then how come she got some where around 3 million more votes than Trump???
One word - California.
That's why California needs to be a separate country.
We don't have enough in common with much of the
rest of the USA, particularly the Bible Belt.
Perhaps we could make a split like the British did for India in 1947
when it formed Pakistan as an eastern part and a western part. Oh Yea,
that turned out to be a not very good idea!
I think California is different from India Pakistan.
For one thing, the loonies are mostly in the part
that's not California, whereas in the India-Pakistan
split, the loonies were mostly in the smaller Pakistan.
I really would like a long vacation from loonies
in and influencing politics. Just not having my flesh
crawl periodically whenever I see Mitch McConnel's
mug on TV would make it worth it. I mean nasty
loonies that is - we have loonies in California too
of course, but except for a few up in the mountains,
they're not as ugly-minded.
Gandhi was really upset by the India/Pakistan
split, BTW. It was all "India" to him.
Yea, a long vacation from the loonies would be luxurious!
I've been occupying myself lately with an update on my "50 experiments
in democracy" project which was a nerdy look at the measurable results
of governance in all 50 states. The previous work focused on 2008, or
as close as I could get data prior to the Great Recession. I'm now
focusing on 2015, when the Great Recession was essentially over. While
conservative governance in the 50 states has increased, the benefits to
the public have declined, at least in the data that I've compiled so far.
We both know that your choice and treatment of data will be influenced
by your desired result -- a result which is a foregone conclusion, so
why bother?
"I often say that when you can measure what you are speaking about,
and express it in numbers, you know something about it; but when you
cannot measure it, when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge
is of a meagre and unsatisfactory kind." ...Lord Kelvin
Kelvin of course was speaking of science, not sociology.
The difference is transcendent, in practice and in theory.
Science is hard - sociology is softer than marshmallows.
El Castor
2017-03-04 08:32:28 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
<snip>
Post by JackPineSavage
Post by wolfbat359
Then how come she got some where around 3 million more votes than Trump???
One word - California.
That's why California needs to be a separate country.
We don't have enough in common with much of the
rest of the USA, particularly the Bible Belt.
Perhaps we could make a split like the British did for India in 1947
when it formed Pakistan as an eastern part and a western part. Oh Yea,
that turned out to be a not very good idea!
I think California is different from India Pakistan.
For one thing, the loonies are mostly in the part
that's not California, whereas in the India-Pakistan
split, the loonies were mostly in the smaller Pakistan.
I really would like a long vacation from loonies
in and influencing politics. Just not having my flesh
crawl periodically whenever I see Mitch McConnel's
mug on TV would make it worth it. I mean nasty
loonies that is - we have loonies in California too
of course, but except for a few up in the mountains,
they're not as ugly-minded.
Gandhi was really upset by the India/Pakistan
split, BTW. It was all "India" to him.
Yea, a long vacation from the loonies would be luxurious!
I've been occupying myself lately with an update on my "50 experiments
in democracy" project which was a nerdy look at the measurable results
of governance in all 50 states. The previous work focused on 2008, or
as close as I could get data prior to the Great Recession. I'm now
focusing on 2015, when the Great Recession was essentially over. While
conservative governance in the 50 states has increased, the benefits to
the public have declined, at least in the data that I've compiled so far.
We both know that your choice and treatment of data will be influenced
by your desired result -- a result which is a foregone conclusion, so
why bother?
"I often say that when you can measure what you are speaking about,
and express it in numbers, you know something about it; but when you
cannot measure it, when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge
is of a meagre and unsatisfactory kind." ...Lord Kelvin
"When the day comes that your numbers prove your liberal dogma to be
wrong, please let me know." ...El Castor
islander
2017-03-06 16:18:13 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
<snip>
Post by JackPineSavage
Post by wolfbat359
Then how come she got some where around 3 million more votes than Trump???
One word - California.
That's why California needs to be a separate country.
We don't have enough in common with much of the
rest of the USA, particularly the Bible Belt.
Perhaps we could make a split like the British did for India in 1947
when it formed Pakistan as an eastern part and a western part. Oh Yea,
that turned out to be a not very good idea!
I think California is different from India Pakistan.
For one thing, the loonies are mostly in the part
that's not California, whereas in the India-Pakistan
split, the loonies were mostly in the smaller Pakistan.
I really would like a long vacation from loonies
in and influencing politics. Just not having my flesh
crawl periodically whenever I see Mitch McConnel's
mug on TV would make it worth it. I mean nasty
loonies that is - we have loonies in California too
of course, but except for a few up in the mountains,
they're not as ugly-minded.
Gandhi was really upset by the India/Pakistan
split, BTW. It was all "India" to him.
Yea, a long vacation from the loonies would be luxurious!
I've been occupying myself lately with an update on my "50 experiments
in democracy" project which was a nerdy look at the measurable results
of governance in all 50 states. The previous work focused on 2008, or
as close as I could get data prior to the Great Recession. I'm now
focusing on 2015, when the Great Recession was essentially over. While
conservative governance in the 50 states has increased, the benefits to
the public have declined, at least in the data that I've compiled so far.
We both know that your choice and treatment of data will be influenced
by your desired result -- a result which is a foregone conclusion, so
why bother?
"I often say that when you can measure what you are speaking about,
and express it in numbers, you know something about it; but when you
cannot measure it, when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge
is of a meagre and unsatisfactory kind." ...Lord Kelvin
"When the day comes that your numbers prove your liberal dogma to be
wrong, please let me know." ...El Castor
When the numbers prove that any aspect of your conservative dogma is
misguided, will you concede that point?
El Castor
2017-03-06 21:07:22 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
<snip>
Post by JackPineSavage
Post by wolfbat359
Then how come she got some where around 3 million more votes than Trump???
One word - California.
That's why California needs to be a separate country.
We don't have enough in common with much of the
rest of the USA, particularly the Bible Belt.
Perhaps we could make a split like the British did for India in 1947
when it formed Pakistan as an eastern part and a western part. Oh Yea,
that turned out to be a not very good idea!
I think California is different from India Pakistan.
For one thing, the loonies are mostly in the part
that's not California, whereas in the India-Pakistan
split, the loonies were mostly in the smaller Pakistan.
I really would like a long vacation from loonies
in and influencing politics. Just not having my flesh
crawl periodically whenever I see Mitch McConnel's
mug on TV would make it worth it. I mean nasty
loonies that is - we have loonies in California too
of course, but except for a few up in the mountains,
they're not as ugly-minded.
Gandhi was really upset by the India/Pakistan
split, BTW. It was all "India" to him.
Yea, a long vacation from the loonies would be luxurious!
I've been occupying myself lately with an update on my "50 experiments
in democracy" project which was a nerdy look at the measurable results
of governance in all 50 states. The previous work focused on 2008, or
as close as I could get data prior to the Great Recession. I'm now
focusing on 2015, when the Great Recession was essentially over. While
conservative governance in the 50 states has increased, the benefits to
the public have declined, at least in the data that I've compiled so far.
We both know that your choice and treatment of data will be influenced
by your desired result -- a result which is a foregone conclusion, so
why bother?
"I often say that when you can measure what you are speaking about,
and express it in numbers, you know something about it; but when you
cannot measure it, when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge
is of a meagre and unsatisfactory kind." ...Lord Kelvin
"When the day comes that your numbers prove your liberal dogma to be
wrong, please let me know." ...El Castor
When the numbers prove that any aspect of your conservative dogma is
misguided, will you concede that point?
Of course.
islander
2017-03-07 16:28:14 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
<snip>
Post by JackPineSavage
Post by wolfbat359
Then how come she got some where around 3 million more votes than Trump???
One word - California.
That's why California needs to be a separate country.
We don't have enough in common with much of the
rest of the USA, particularly the Bible Belt.
Perhaps we could make a split like the British did for India in 1947
when it formed Pakistan as an eastern part and a western part. Oh Yea,
that turned out to be a not very good idea!
I think California is different from India Pakistan.
For one thing, the loonies are mostly in the part
that's not California, whereas in the India-Pakistan
split, the loonies were mostly in the smaller Pakistan.
I really would like a long vacation from loonies
in and influencing politics. Just not having my flesh
crawl periodically whenever I see Mitch McConnel's
mug on TV would make it worth it. I mean nasty
loonies that is - we have loonies in California too
of course, but except for a few up in the mountains,
they're not as ugly-minded.
Gandhi was really upset by the India/Pakistan
split, BTW. It was all "India" to him.
Yea, a long vacation from the loonies would be luxurious!
I've been occupying myself lately with an update on my "50 experiments
in democracy" project which was a nerdy look at the measurable results
of governance in all 50 states. The previous work focused on 2008, or
as close as I could get data prior to the Great Recession. I'm now
focusing on 2015, when the Great Recession was essentially over. While
conservative governance in the 50 states has increased, the benefits to
the public have declined, at least in the data that I've compiled so far.
We both know that your choice and treatment of data will be influenced
by your desired result -- a result which is a foregone conclusion, so
why bother?
"I often say that when you can measure what you are speaking about,
and express it in numbers, you know something about it; but when you
cannot measure it, when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge
is of a meagre and unsatisfactory kind." ...Lord Kelvin
"When the day comes that your numbers prove your liberal dogma to be
wrong, please let me know." ...El Castor
When the numbers prove that any aspect of your conservative dogma is
misguided, will you concede that point?
Of course.
I'll believe that when I see it!
El Castor
2017-03-07 21:43:34 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
<snip>
Post by JackPineSavage
Post by wolfbat359
Then how come she got some where around 3 million more votes than Trump???
One word - California.
That's why California needs to be a separate country.
We don't have enough in common with much of the
rest of the USA, particularly the Bible Belt.
Perhaps we could make a split like the British did for India in 1947
when it formed Pakistan as an eastern part and a western part. Oh Yea,
that turned out to be a not very good idea!
I think California is different from India Pakistan.
For one thing, the loonies are mostly in the part
that's not California, whereas in the India-Pakistan
split, the loonies were mostly in the smaller Pakistan.
I really would like a long vacation from loonies
in and influencing politics. Just not having my flesh
crawl periodically whenever I see Mitch McConnel's
mug on TV would make it worth it. I mean nasty
loonies that is - we have loonies in California too
of course, but except for a few up in the mountains,
they're not as ugly-minded.
Gandhi was really upset by the India/Pakistan
split, BTW. It was all "India" to him.
Yea, a long vacation from the loonies would be luxurious!
I've been occupying myself lately with an update on my "50 experiments
in democracy" project which was a nerdy look at the measurable results
of governance in all 50 states. The previous work focused on 2008, or
as close as I could get data prior to the Great Recession. I'm now
focusing on 2015, when the Great Recession was essentially over. While
conservative governance in the 50 states has increased, the benefits to
the public have declined, at least in the data that I've compiled so far.
We both know that your choice and treatment of data will be influenced
by your desired result -- a result which is a foregone conclusion, so
why bother?
"I often say that when you can measure what you are speaking about,
and express it in numbers, you know something about it; but when you
cannot measure it, when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge
is of a meagre and unsatisfactory kind." ...Lord Kelvin
"When the day comes that your numbers prove your liberal dogma to be
wrong, please let me know." ...El Castor
When the numbers prove that any aspect of your conservative dogma is
misguided, will you concede that point?
Of course.
I'll believe that when I see it!
Here's one. Bush's invasion of Iraq -- huge misguided mistake.

Now, give me a an example of a liberal error -- not failure to prevent
some conservative error -- a genuine liberal mistake.
islander
2017-03-08 15:46:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
<snip>
Post by JackPineSavage
Post by wolfbat359
Then how come she got some where around 3 million more votes than Trump???
One word - California.
That's why California needs to be a separate country.
We don't have enough in common with much of the
rest of the USA, particularly the Bible Belt.
Perhaps we could make a split like the British did for India in 1947
when it formed Pakistan as an eastern part and a western part. Oh Yea,
that turned out to be a not very good idea!
I think California is different from India Pakistan.
For one thing, the loonies are mostly in the part
that's not California, whereas in the India-Pakistan
split, the loonies were mostly in the smaller Pakistan.
I really would like a long vacation from loonies
in and influencing politics. Just not having my flesh
crawl periodically whenever I see Mitch McConnel's
mug on TV would make it worth it. I mean nasty
loonies that is - we have loonies in California too
of course, but except for a few up in the mountains,
they're not as ugly-minded.
Gandhi was really upset by the India/Pakistan
split, BTW. It was all "India" to him.
Yea, a long vacation from the loonies would be luxurious!
I've been occupying myself lately with an update on my "50 experiments
in democracy" project which was a nerdy look at the measurable results
of governance in all 50 states. The previous work focused on 2008, or
as close as I could get data prior to the Great Recession. I'm now
focusing on 2015, when the Great Recession was essentially over. While
conservative governance in the 50 states has increased, the benefits to
the public have declined, at least in the data that I've compiled so far.
We both know that your choice and treatment of data will be influenced
by your desired result -- a result which is a foregone conclusion, so
why bother?
"I often say that when you can measure what you are speaking about,
and express it in numbers, you know something about it; but when you
cannot measure it, when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge
is of a meagre and unsatisfactory kind." ...Lord Kelvin
"When the day comes that your numbers prove your liberal dogma to be
wrong, please let me know." ...El Castor
When the numbers prove that any aspect of your conservative dogma is
misguided, will you concede that point?
Of course.
I'll believe that when I see it!
Here's one. Bush's invasion of Iraq -- huge misguided mistake.
Now, give me a an example of a liberal error -- not failure to prevent
some conservative error -- a genuine liberal mistake.
Bill Clinton made several mistakes, all leading or contributing to the
Great Recession. Two of these mistakes were in signing the
Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 which removed the firewall that prevented
conflict of interest between commercial and investment banking divisions
and the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000 which blinded
regulators to trading of credit default swaps. Nearly as bad was the
Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act of 1996 which did not
anticipate the plight of people put out of work for an extended period
during the Great Recession.

I don't know if he could have stopped the first two, but he deserves a
major part of the blame for the third.
El Castor
2017-03-08 17:27:12 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
<snip>
Post by JackPineSavage
Post by wolfbat359
Then how come she got some where around 3 million more votes than Trump???
One word - California.
That's why California needs to be a separate country.
We don't have enough in common with much of the
rest of the USA, particularly the Bible Belt.
Perhaps we could make a split like the British did for India in 1947
when it formed Pakistan as an eastern part and a western part. Oh Yea,
that turned out to be a not very good idea!
I think California is different from India Pakistan.
For one thing, the loonies are mostly in the part
that's not California, whereas in the India-Pakistan
split, the loonies were mostly in the smaller Pakistan.
I really would like a long vacation from loonies
in and influencing politics. Just not having my flesh
crawl periodically whenever I see Mitch McConnel's
mug on TV would make it worth it. I mean nasty
loonies that is - we have loonies in California too
of course, but except for a few up in the mountains,
they're not as ugly-minded.
Gandhi was really upset by the India/Pakistan
split, BTW. It was all "India" to him.
Yea, a long vacation from the loonies would be luxurious!
I've been occupying myself lately with an update on my "50 experiments
in democracy" project which was a nerdy look at the measurable results
of governance in all 50 states. The previous work focused on 2008, or
as close as I could get data prior to the Great Recession. I'm now
focusing on 2015, when the Great Recession was essentially over. While
conservative governance in the 50 states has increased, the benefits to
the public have declined, at least in the data that I've compiled so far.
We both know that your choice and treatment of data will be influenced
by your desired result -- a result which is a foregone conclusion, so
why bother?
"I often say that when you can measure what you are speaking about,
and express it in numbers, you know something about it; but when you
cannot measure it, when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge
is of a meagre and unsatisfactory kind." ...Lord Kelvin
"When the day comes that your numbers prove your liberal dogma to be
wrong, please let me know." ...El Castor
When the numbers prove that any aspect of your conservative dogma is
misguided, will you concede that point?
Of course.
I'll believe that when I see it!
Here's one. Bush's invasion of Iraq -- huge misguided mistake.
Now, give me a an example of a liberal error -- not failure to prevent
some conservative error -- a genuine liberal mistake.
Bill Clinton made several mistakes, all leading or contributing to the
Great Recession. Two of these mistakes were in signing the
Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 which removed the firewall that prevented
conflict of interest between commercial and investment banking divisions
and the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000 which blinded
regulators to trading of credit default swaps. Nearly as bad was the
Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act of 1996 which did not
anticipate the plight of people put out of work for an extended period
during the Great Recession.
I don't know if he could have stopped the first two, but he deserves a
major part of the blame for the third.
I asked for an example of a genuine "liberal" mistake -- not an
example of failing to be liberal enough. (-8
islander
2017-03-09 02:43:52 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
<snip>
Post by JackPineSavage
Post by wolfbat359
Then how come she got some where around 3 million more votes than Trump???
One word - California.
That's why California needs to be a separate country.
We don't have enough in common with much of the
rest of the USA, particularly the Bible Belt.
Perhaps we could make a split like the British did for India in 1947
when it formed Pakistan as an eastern part and a western part. Oh Yea,
that turned out to be a not very good idea!
I think California is different from India Pakistan.
For one thing, the loonies are mostly in the part
that's not California, whereas in the India-Pakistan
split, the loonies were mostly in the smaller Pakistan.
I really would like a long vacation from loonies
in and influencing politics. Just not having my flesh
crawl periodically whenever I see Mitch McConnel's
mug on TV would make it worth it. I mean nasty
loonies that is - we have loonies in California too
of course, but except for a few up in the mountains,
they're not as ugly-minded.
Gandhi was really upset by the India/Pakistan
split, BTW. It was all "India" to him.
Yea, a long vacation from the loonies would be luxurious!
I've been occupying myself lately with an update on my "50 experiments
in democracy" project which was a nerdy look at the measurable results
of governance in all 50 states. The previous work focused on 2008, or
as close as I could get data prior to the Great Recession. I'm now
focusing on 2015, when the Great Recession was essentially over. While
conservative governance in the 50 states has increased, the benefits to
the public have declined, at least in the data that I've compiled so far.
We both know that your choice and treatment of data will be influenced
by your desired result -- a result which is a foregone conclusion, so
why bother?
"I often say that when you can measure what you are speaking about,
and express it in numbers, you know something about it; but when you
cannot measure it, when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge
is of a meagre and unsatisfactory kind." ...Lord Kelvin
"When the day comes that your numbers prove your liberal dogma to be
wrong, please let me know." ...El Castor
When the numbers prove that any aspect of your conservative dogma is
misguided, will you concede that point?
Of course.
I'll believe that when I see it!
Here's one. Bush's invasion of Iraq -- huge misguided mistake.
Now, give me a an example of a liberal error -- not failure to prevent
some conservative error -- a genuine liberal mistake.
Bill Clinton made several mistakes, all leading or contributing to the
Great Recession. Two of these mistakes were in signing the
Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 which removed the firewall that prevented
conflict of interest between commercial and investment banking divisions
and the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000 which blinded
regulators to trading of credit default swaps. Nearly as bad was the
Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act of 1996 which did not
anticipate the plight of people put out of work for an extended period
during the Great Recession.
I don't know if he could have stopped the first two, but he deserves a
major part of the blame for the third.
I asked for an example of a genuine "liberal" mistake -- not an
example of failing to be liberal enough. (-8
Now you are splitting hairs.
rumpelstiltskin
2017-03-08 18:59:52 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
<snip>
Post by JackPineSavage
Post by wolfbat359
Then how come she got some where around 3 million more votes than Trump???
One word - California.
That's why California needs to be a separate country.
We don't have enough in common with much of the
rest of the USA, particularly the Bible Belt.
Perhaps we could make a split like the British did for India in 1947
when it formed Pakistan as an eastern part and a western part. Oh Yea,
that turned out to be a not very good idea!
I think California is different from India Pakistan.
For one thing, the loonies are mostly in the part
that's not California, whereas in the India-Pakistan
split, the loonies were mostly in the smaller Pakistan.
I really would like a long vacation from loonies
in and influencing politics. Just not having my flesh
crawl periodically whenever I see Mitch McConnel's
mug on TV would make it worth it. I mean nasty
loonies that is - we have loonies in California too
of course, but except for a few up in the mountains,
they're not as ugly-minded.
Gandhi was really upset by the India/Pakistan
split, BTW. It was all "India" to him.
Yea, a long vacation from the loonies would be luxurious!
I've been occupying myself lately with an update on my "50 experiments
in democracy" project which was a nerdy look at the measurable results
of governance in all 50 states. The previous work focused on 2008, or
as close as I could get data prior to the Great Recession. I'm now
focusing on 2015, when the Great Recession was essentially over. While
conservative governance in the 50 states has increased, the benefits to
the public have declined, at least in the data that I've compiled so far.
We both know that your choice and treatment of data will be influenced
by your desired result -- a result which is a foregone conclusion, so
why bother?
"I often say that when you can measure what you are speaking about,
and express it in numbers, you know something about it; but when you
cannot measure it, when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge
is of a meagre and unsatisfactory kind." ...Lord Kelvin
"When the day comes that your numbers prove your liberal dogma to be
wrong, please let me know." ...El Castor
When the numbers prove that any aspect of your conservative dogma is
misguided, will you concede that point?
Of course.
I'll believe that when I see it!
Here's one. Bush's invasion of Iraq -- huge misguided mistake.
Now, give me a an example of a liberal error -- not failure to prevent
some conservative error -- a genuine liberal mistake.
Bill Clinton made several mistakes, all leading or contributing to the
Great Recession. Two of these mistakes were in signing the
Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 which removed the firewall that prevented
conflict of interest between commercial and investment banking divisions
and the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000 which blinded
regulators to trading of credit default swaps. Nearly as bad was the
Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act of 1996 which did not
anticipate the plight of people put out of work for an extended period
during the Great Recession.
I don't know if he could have stopped the first two, but he deserves a
major part of the blame for the third.
"blinded regulators to trading of credit default swaps"
is a tough phrase for me to wrap my head around!
It's almost as tough as the Mozart C major fugue from
K 394 that I'm trying to learn to play now, that jumps
around from dissonance to dissonance all over the place.

It might help if I could even conceive of what a
"credit default swap" might be. In my experience,
whenever somebody has a "credit default" with me,
I'm stuck with it. I don't get to "swap" it off to
anybody. Maybe Dickens was right about bankers!
islander
2017-03-09 02:41:13 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
<snip>
Post by JackPineSavage
Post by wolfbat359
Then how come she got some where around 3 million more votes than Trump???
One word - California.
That's why California needs to be a separate country.
We don't have enough in common with much of the
rest of the USA, particularly the Bible Belt.
Perhaps we could make a split like the British did for India in 1947
when it formed Pakistan as an eastern part and a western part. Oh Yea,
that turned out to be a not very good idea!
I think California is different from India Pakistan.
For one thing, the loonies are mostly in the part
that's not California, whereas in the India-Pakistan
split, the loonies were mostly in the smaller Pakistan.
I really would like a long vacation from loonies
in and influencing politics. Just not having my flesh
crawl periodically whenever I see Mitch McConnel's
mug on TV would make it worth it. I mean nasty
loonies that is - we have loonies in California too
of course, but except for a few up in the mountains,
they're not as ugly-minded.
Gandhi was really upset by the India/Pakistan
split, BTW. It was all "India" to him.
Yea, a long vacation from the loonies would be luxurious!
I've been occupying myself lately with an update on my "50 experiments
in democracy" project which was a nerdy look at the measurable results
of governance in all 50 states. The previous work focused on 2008, or
as close as I could get data prior to the Great Recession. I'm now
focusing on 2015, when the Great Recession was essentially over. While
conservative governance in the 50 states has increased, the benefits to
the public have declined, at least in the data that I've compiled so far.
We both know that your choice and treatment of data will be influenced
by your desired result -- a result which is a foregone conclusion, so
why bother?
"I often say that when you can measure what you are speaking about,
and express it in numbers, you know something about it; but when you
cannot measure it, when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge
is of a meagre and unsatisfactory kind." ...Lord Kelvin
"When the day comes that your numbers prove your liberal dogma to be
wrong, please let me know." ...El Castor
When the numbers prove that any aspect of your conservative dogma is
misguided, will you concede that point?
Of course.
I'll believe that when I see it!
Here's one. Bush's invasion of Iraq -- huge misguided mistake.
Now, give me a an example of a liberal error -- not failure to prevent
some conservative error -- a genuine liberal mistake.
Bill Clinton made several mistakes, all leading or contributing to the
Great Recession. Two of these mistakes were in signing the
Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 which removed the firewall that prevented
conflict of interest between commercial and investment banking divisions
and the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000 which blinded
regulators to trading of credit default swaps. Nearly as bad was the
Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act of 1996 which did not
anticipate the plight of people put out of work for an extended period
during the Great Recession.
I don't know if he could have stopped the first two, but he deserves a
major part of the blame for the third.
"blinded regulators to trading of credit default swaps"
is a tough phrase for me to wrap my head around!
It's almost as tough as the Mozart C major fugue from
K 394 that I'm trying to learn to play now, that jumps
around from dissonance to dissonance all over the place.
It might help if I could even conceive of what a
"credit default swap" might be. In my experience,
whenever somebody has a "credit default" with me,
I'm stuck with it. I don't get to "swap" it off to
anybody. Maybe Dickens was right about bankers!
Credit default swaps were the mechanism that banks and hedge funds used
in an attempt to cover their risk if some other deal like a derivative
went south. These were believed to make bundled investments fail-safe.
They were until the insurance companies that issued them started seeing
a lot of shaky deals going south.
rumpelstiltskin
2017-03-09 04:35:13 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
<snip>
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by islander
Bill Clinton made several mistakes, all leading or contributing to the
Great Recession. Two of these mistakes were in signing the
Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 which removed the firewall that prevented
conflict of interest between commercial and investment banking divisions
and the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000 which blinded
regulators to trading of credit default swaps. Nearly as bad was the
Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act of 1996 which did not
anticipate the plight of people put out of work for an extended period
during the Great Recession.
I don't know if he could have stopped the first two, but he deserves a
major part of the blame for the third.
"blinded regulators to trading of credit default swaps"
is a tough phrase for me to wrap my head around!
It's almost as tough as the Mozart C major fugue from
K 394 that I'm trying to learn to play now, that jumps
around from dissonance to dissonance all over the place.
It might help if I could even conceive of what a
"credit default swap" might be. In my experience,
whenever somebody has a "credit default" with me,
I'm stuck with it. I don't get to "swap" it off to
anybody. Maybe Dickens was right about bankers!
Credit default swaps were the mechanism that banks and hedge funds used
in an attempt to cover their risk if some other deal like a derivative
went south. These were believed to make bundled investments fail-safe.
They were until the insurance companies that issued them started seeing
a lot of shaky deals going south.
We do indeed live in a "kleptocracy", and the federal
government is a party to it. The kleptocrats are
winning: you and I are the dumb ones for trying to
behave honestly and decently toward other people.
That's a strategy for "losers".
islander
2017-03-09 15:51:11 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by rumpelstiltskin
<snip>
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by islander
Bill Clinton made several mistakes, all leading or contributing to the
Great Recession. Two of these mistakes were in signing the
Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 which removed the firewall that prevented
conflict of interest between commercial and investment banking divisions
and the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000 which blinded
regulators to trading of credit default swaps. Nearly as bad was the
Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act of 1996 which did not
anticipate the plight of people put out of work for an extended period
during the Great Recession.
I don't know if he could have stopped the first two, but he deserves a
major part of the blame for the third.
"blinded regulators to trading of credit default swaps"
is a tough phrase for me to wrap my head around!
It's almost as tough as the Mozart C major fugue from
K 394 that I'm trying to learn to play now, that jumps
around from dissonance to dissonance all over the place.
It might help if I could even conceive of what a
"credit default swap" might be. In my experience,
whenever somebody has a "credit default" with me,
I'm stuck with it. I don't get to "swap" it off to
anybody. Maybe Dickens was right about bankers!
Credit default swaps were the mechanism that banks and hedge funds used
in an attempt to cover their risk if some other deal like a derivative
went south. These were believed to make bundled investments fail-safe.
They were until the insurance companies that issued them started seeing
a lot of shaky deals going south.
We do indeed live in a "kleptocracy", and the federal
government is a party to it. The kleptocrats are
winning: you and I are the dumb ones for trying to
behave honestly and decently toward other people.
That's a strategy for "losers".
There are still provisions of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and
Consumer Protection Act of 2010 that have not been implemented. Now
that Trump has issued an order that no new regulation can be put in
place until two others are eliminated, it is doubtful that these needed
restraints on the kleptocrats will ever be implemented. In fact, the
Republican Congress is moving toward repealing the entire Dodd-Frank
act. The Consumer Credit Protection Bureau is already in trouble in the
upcoming fiscal budget process.

Yes, the kleptocrats are in charge!

billbowden
2017-03-03 11:32:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by rumpelstiltskin
<snip>
Post by JackPineSavage
Post by wolfbat359
Then how come she got some where around 3 million more votes than Trump???
One word - California.
That's why California needs to be a separate country.
We don't have enough in common with much of the
rest of the USA, particularly the Bible Belt.
If California becomes a separate country, how will it replace the 50 billion
in federal aid it no longer gets?
rumpelstiltskin
2017-03-03 13:37:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Fri, 3 Mar 2017 03:32:20 -0800, "billbowden"
Post by billbowden
Post by rumpelstiltskin
<snip>
Post by JackPineSavage
Post by wolfbat359
Then how come she got some where around 3 million more votes than Trump???
One word - California.
That's why California needs to be a separate country.
We don't have enough in common with much of the
rest of the USA, particularly the Bible Belt.
If California becomes a separate country, how will it replace the 50 billion
in federal aid it no longer gets?
My understanding is that the federal government
collects far more from California than California
gets back, which money goes to support perpetual
war and states that get back more than they give,
among other things. In that case, if California
splits off, it won't be supplying that money to the
government anymore. We'll have to create our
own defense machine of course, to protect us
against invasion from China in particular, but
hopefully California's defense won't be as bloated
and as feed-the-rich as the current US defense
machine.

According to the Wiki article below, the federal
government collected 405 billion from California
in 2015.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_tax_revenue_by_state

That's not the highest per capita. According to
the maps below the main tables at that page,
Delaware and DC give the biggest proportion, with
Minnesota and New Jersey and Connecticut
following among the bigger states. In the case of
Connecticut, I'd bet the bulk comes not from the
people, but from the monstrous health care industry
centered there under the USA's piratical health
system (which can be expected to become even
more piratical under the new administration).
Connecticut is a rich state anyway though, even
without counting health care piracy.
islander
2017-03-03 16:51:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Fri, 3 Mar 2017 03:32:20 -0800, "billbowden"
Post by billbowden
Post by rumpelstiltskin
<snip>
Post by JackPineSavage
Post by wolfbat359
Then how come she got some where around 3 million more votes than Trump???
One word - California.
That's why California needs to be a separate country.
We don't have enough in common with much of the
rest of the USA, particularly the Bible Belt.
If California becomes a separate country, how will it replace the 50 billion
in federal aid it no longer gets?
My understanding is that the federal government
collects far more from California than California
gets back, which money goes to support perpetual
war and states that get back more than they give,
among other things. In that case, if California
splits off, it won't be supplying that money to the
government anymore. We'll have to create our
own defense machine of course, to protect us
against invasion from China in particular, but
hopefully California's defense won't be as bloated
and as feed-the-rich as the current US defense
machine.
According to the Wiki article below, the federal
government collected 405 billion from California
in 2015.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_tax_revenue_by_state
That's not the highest per capita. According to
the maps below the main tables at that page,
Delaware and DC give the biggest proportion, with
Minnesota and New Jersey and Connecticut
following among the bigger states. In the case of
Connecticut, I'd bet the bulk comes not from the
people, but from the monstrous health care industry
centered there under the USA's piratical health
system (which can be expected to become even
more piratical under the new administration).
Connecticut is a rich state anyway though, even
without counting health care piracy.
There are exceptions, but generally red states get more from the federal
government than blue states. 14 states including California get back
less than they pay. All the rest get back more. The worst are South
Carolina, North Dakota, Florida, Louisiana and Alabama. (2014 data).
billbowden
2017-03-04 04:25:11 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Fri, 3 Mar 2017 03:32:20 -0800, "billbowden"
Post by billbowden
Post by rumpelstiltskin
<snip>
Post by JackPineSavage
Post by wolfbat359
Then how come she got some where around 3 million more votes than Trump???
One word - California.
That's why California needs to be a separate country.
We don't have enough in common with much of the
rest of the USA, particularly the Bible Belt.
If California becomes a separate country, how will it replace the 50 billion
in federal aid it no longer gets?
My understanding is that the federal government
collects far more from California than California
gets back, which money goes to support perpetual
war and states that get back more than they give,
among other things. In that case, if California
splits off, it won't be supplying that money to the
government anymore. We'll have to create our
own defense machine of course, to protect us
against invasion from China in particular, but
hopefully California's defense won't be as bloated
and as feed-the-rich as the current US defense
machine.
According to the Wiki article below, the federal
government collected 405 billion from California
in 2015.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_tax_revenue_by_state
That's not the highest per capita. According to
the maps below the main tables at that page,
Delaware and DC give the biggest proportion, with
Minnesota and New Jersey and Connecticut
following among the bigger states. In the case of
Connecticut, I'd bet the bulk comes not from the
people, but from the monstrous health care industry
centered there under the USA's piratical health
system (which can be expected to become even
more piratical under the new administration).
Connecticut is a rich state anyway though, even
without counting health care piracy.
According to this, California gets more federal aid than any other state.

http://www.lao.ca.gov/LAOEconTax/Article/Detail/131

"California Receives More Federal Money Than Any Other State. In FFY
2012-13, California received $343 billion in federal spending. As shown in
Figure 1, that amount was more than any other state received and about $100
billion more than the next largest recipient of federal funds, Texas. In
absolute terms, California receives the largest quantity of federal funding
because it has the nation's largest population."
rumpelstiltskin
2017-03-04 06:34:42 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Fri, 3 Mar 2017 20:25:11 -0800, "billbowden"
Post by billbowden
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Fri, 3 Mar 2017 03:32:20 -0800, "billbowden"
Post by billbowden
Post by rumpelstiltskin
<snip>
Post by JackPineSavage
Post by wolfbat359
Then how come she got some where around 3 million more votes than Trump???
One word - California.
That's why California needs to be a separate country.
We don't have enough in common with much of the
rest of the USA, particularly the Bible Belt.
If California becomes a separate country, how will it replace the 50 billion
in federal aid it no longer gets?
My understanding is that the federal government
collects far more from California than California
gets back, which money goes to support perpetual
war and states that get back more than they give,
among other things. In that case, if California
splits off, it won't be supplying that money to the
government anymore. We'll have to create our
own defense machine of course, to protect us
against invasion from China in particular, but
hopefully California's defense won't be as bloated
and as feed-the-rich as the current US defense
machine.
According to the Wiki article below, the federal
government collected 405 billion from California
in 2015.
https://en.wikipe201dia.org/wiki/Federal_tax_revenue_by_state
That's not the highest per capita. According to
the maps below the main tables at that page,
Delaware and DC give the biggest proportion, with
Minnesota and New Jersey and Connecticut
following among the bigger states. In the case of
Connecticut, I'd bet the bulk comes not from the
people, but from the monstrous health care industry
centered there under the USA's piratical health
system (which can be expected to become even
more piratical under the new administration).
Connecticut is a rich state anyway though, even
without counting health care piracy.
According to this, California gets more federal aid than any other state.
http://www.lao.ca.gov/LAOEconTax/Article/Detail/131
"California Receives More Federal Money Than Any Other State. In FFY
2012-13, California received $343 billion in federal spending. As shown in
Figure 1, that amount was more than any other state received and about $100
billion more than the next largest recipient of federal funds, Texas. In
absolute terms, California receives the largest quantity of federal funding
because it has the nation's largest population."
According to my URL, California paid:

FY 2011 $281 billion (Oct 1 2010 - Sept 30 2011)
FY 2012 $292 billion (Oct 1 2011 - Sept 30 2012)
FY 2015 $405 billion (Oct 1 2014 - Sept 30 2015)

I don't know what range of dates is covered by
"FFY" in your URL, but whatever it is, it can't be
any worse than a "FY" at my URL that runs from
October to September!

Anyhow, even if California gets more aid than
it receives (which I very much doubt), that's all the
more reason you should be jumping for joy if we
secede! Everybody will be happy! I sure will be
happy. As I mentioned, I'll even apply for California
citizenship right away, though I've never applied for
American citizenship despite living in the USA since
1951.

1945-1951 Yorkshire (near Rotherham)
1951-1966 Massachusetts (near Fall River)
1966-1969 upstate New York (Endicott)
1969-now California (San Francisco)

If I had to live anywhere in the USA other
than California, I'd pick New York City. If I
went back to England, I'd pick London.



"Why, Sir, you find no man, at all intellectual, who
is willing to leave London. No, Sir, when a man is
tired of London, he is tired of life; for there is in
London all that life can afford."
— Samuel Johnson
El Castor
2017-03-03 20:27:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Fri, 3 Mar 2017 03:32:20 -0800, "billbowden"
Post by billbowden
Post by rumpelstiltskin
<snip>
Post by JackPineSavage
Post by wolfbat359
Then how come she got some where around 3 million more votes than Trump???
One word - California.
That's why California needs to be a separate country.
We don't have enough in common with much of the
rest of the USA, particularly the Bible Belt.
If California becomes a separate country, how will it replace the 50 billion
in federal aid it no longer gets?
If California becomes a separate country, I'm emigrating to Texas, and
taking my assets with me, but not to worry, it ain't going to happen.
mg
2017-03-01 19:34:44 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 1 Mar 2017 07:08:36 -0800 (PST), wolfbat359
Post by wolfbat359
Post by mg
The Democratic party has morphed into the black people's party and
the Republican party has become the white people's party.
"Whites vs. nonwhite voters
Whites made up 70 percent of voters
58 percent of all whites voted for Trump
21 percent of nonwhites voted for Trump
White men
White men made up 34 percent of voters
63 percent of them voted Trump
31 percent voted Clinton
White women
White women made up 37 percent of voters
53 percent of them voted Trump
43 percent voted Clinton
Young whites (ages 18-29)
Young white people made up 12 percent of voters
48 percent of them voted Trump
43 percent voted Clinton
In comparison, 9 percent of young blacks and 24 percent of young
Latinos voted for Trump.
College-educated whites
White college graduates made up 37 percent of voters
49 percent of them voted for Trump, while 45 percent voted for
Clinton.
54 percent of college-educated white men voted Trump.
45 percent of college-educated white women chose Trump, while 51
percent chose Clinton. This is the only white demographic tracked by
the exit poll that Trump didn’t win.
Non-college-educated whites
Whites without a college degree made up 34 percent of voters
67 percent of them voted for Trump
Of the women in this group, 62 percent voted for Trump
And men voted 72 percent for Trump
Data for white women 18-29 and white men 18-29 weren’t reported."
https://news.vice.com/story/white-people-voted-to-elect-donald-trump
Then how come she got some where around 3 million more votes than Trump???
Hillary got 88% of the black vote and Trump only got 8%.

Obama, however, got 93% in 2012. If Hillary had got 93% of the black
vote, like Obama did, I suppose she would have won the election.

https://mic.com/articles/159402/here-s-a-break-down-of-how-african-americans-voted-in-the-2016-election#.wxGR0hU3a
w***@msn.com
2017-03-02 02:15:47 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by mg
On Wed, 1 Mar 2017 07:08:36 -0800 (PST), wolfbat359
Post by wolfbat359
Post by mg
The Democratic party has morphed into the black people's party and
the Republican party has become the white people's party.
"Whites vs. nonwhite voters
Whites made up 70 percent of voters
58 percent of all whites voted for Trump
21 percent of nonwhites voted for Trump
White men
White men made up 34 percent of voters
63 percent of them voted Trump
31 percent voted Clinton
White women
White women made up 37 percent of voters
53 percent of them voted Trump
43 percent voted Clinton
Young whites (ages 18-29)
Young white people made up 12 percent of voters
48 percent of them voted Trump
43 percent voted Clinton
In comparison, 9 percent of young blacks and 24 percent of young
Latinos voted for Trump.
College-educated whites
White college graduates made up 37 percent of voters
49 percent of them voted for Trump, while 45 percent voted for
Clinton.
54 percent of college-educated white men voted Trump.
45 percent of college-educated white women chose Trump, while 51
percent chose Clinton. This is the only white demographic tracked by
the exit poll that Trump didn’t win.
Non-college-educated whites
Whites without a college degree made up 34 percent of voters
67 percent of them voted for Trump
Of the women in this group, 62 percent voted for Trump
And men voted 72 percent for Trump
Data for white women 18-29 and white men 18-29 weren’t reported."
https://news.vice.com/story/white-people-voted-to-elect-donald-trump
Then how come she got some where around 3 million more votes than Trump???
Hillary got 88% of the black vote and Trump only got 8%.
Obama, however, got 93% in 2012. If Hillary had got 93% of the black
vote, like Obama did, I suppose she would have won the election.
https://mic.com/articles/159402/here-s-a-break-down-of-how-african-americans-voted-in-the-2016-election#.wxGR0hU3a
Maybe she should've said she had Negro in her ancestry, like Liz Pocahontas said about her faked Injun ancestry. Where Liz said her grandfather had high cheek bones, Hillary could've said her gramps had thick lips, and a wide nose with a bone going through it. Adding a liitle smudge of blackface and she could've had herself crashing through that mythical plate glass ceiling.
El Castor
2017-03-02 08:52:28 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by mg
On Wed, 1 Mar 2017 07:08:36 -0800 (PST), wolfbat359
Post by wolfbat359
Post by mg
The Democratic party has morphed into the black people's party and
the Republican party has become the white people's party.
"Whites vs. nonwhite voters
Whites made up 70 percent of voters
58 percent of all whites voted for Trump
21 percent of nonwhites voted for Trump
White men
White men made up 34 percent of voters
63 percent of them voted Trump
31 percent voted Clinton
White women
White women made up 37 percent of voters
53 percent of them voted Trump
43 percent voted Clinton
Young whites (ages 18-29)
Young white people made up 12 percent of voters
48 percent of them voted Trump
43 percent voted Clinton
In comparison, 9 percent of young blacks and 24 percent of young
Latinos voted for Trump.
College-educated whites
White college graduates made up 37 percent of voters
49 percent of them voted for Trump, while 45 percent voted for
Clinton.
54 percent of college-educated white men voted Trump.
45 percent of college-educated white women chose Trump, while 51
percent chose Clinton. This is the only white demographic tracked by
the exit poll that Trump didn’t win.
Non-college-educated whites
Whites without a college degree made up 34 percent of voters
67 percent of them voted for Trump
Of the women in this group, 62 percent voted for Trump
And men voted 72 percent for Trump
Data for white women 18-29 and white men 18-29 weren’t reported."
https://news.vice.com/story/white-people-voted-to-elect-donald-trump
Then how come she got some where around 3 million more votes than Trump???
Hillary got 88% of the black vote and Trump only got 8%.
Obama, however, got 93% in 2012. If Hillary had got 93% of the black
vote, like Obama did, I suppose she would have won the election.
https://mic.com/articles/159402/here-s-a-break-down-of-how-african-americans-voted-in-the-2016-election#.wxGR0hU3a
Hillary got 103% of the transgender vote. The Democrat Party is the
Transgender Party -- and the party of the entire basket of
deplorables.
GLOBALIST
2017-03-01 15:44:40 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by mg
The Democratic party has morphed into the black people's party and
the Republican party has become the white people's party.
"Whites vs. nonwhite voters
Whites made up 70 percent of voters
58 percent of all whites voted for Trump
21 percent of nonwhites voted for Trump
White men
White men made up 34 percent of voters
63 percent of them voted Trump
31 percent voted Clinton
White women
White women made up 37 percent of voters
53 percent of them voted Trump
43 percent voted Clinton
Young whites (ages 18-29)
Young white people made up 12 percent of voters
48 percent of them voted Trump
43 percent voted Clinton
In comparison, 9 percent of young blacks and 24 percent of young
Latinos voted for Trump.
College-educated whites
White college graduates made up 37 percent of voters
49 percent of them voted for Trump, while 45 percent voted for
Clinton.
54 percent of college-educated white men voted Trump.
45 percent of college-educated white women chose Trump, while 51
percent chose Clinton. This is the only white demographic tracked by
the exit poll that Trump didn’t win.
Non-college-educated whites
Whites without a college degree made up 34 percent of voters
67 percent of them voted for Trump
Of the women in this group, 62 percent voted for Trump
And men voted 72 percent for Trump
Data for white women 18-29 and white men 18-29 weren’t reported."
https://news.vice.com/story/white-people-voted-to-elect-donald-trump
Boy when you see who they just elected as the chairman of their
party ...good grief...he is creepy looking. Looks like a
gypsy who runs the Ferris Wheel
at a fly by night carnival.
Gary
2017-03-01 15:57:23 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by GLOBALIST
Post by mg
The Democratic party has morphed into the black people's party and
the Republican party has become the white people's party.
"Whites vs. nonwhite voters
Whites made up 70 percent of voters
58 percent of all whites voted for Trump
21 percent of nonwhites voted for Trump
White men
White men made up 34 percent of voters
63 percent of them voted Trump
31 percent voted Clinton
White women
White women made up 37 percent of voters
53 percent of them voted Trump
43 percent voted Clinton
Young whites (ages 18-29)
Young white people made up 12 percent of voters
48 percent of them voted Trump
43 percent voted Clinton
In comparison, 9 percent of young blacks and 24 percent of young
Latinos voted for Trump.
College-educated whites
White college graduates made up 37 percent of voters
49 percent of them voted for Trump, while 45 percent voted for
Clinton.
54 percent of college-educated white men voted Trump.
45 percent of college-educated white women chose Trump, while 51
percent chose Clinton. This is the only white demographic tracked by
the exit poll that Trump didn’t win.
Non-college-educated whites
Whites without a college degree made up 34 percent of voters
67 percent of them voted for Trump
Of the women in this group, 62 percent voted for Trump
And men voted 72 percent for Trump
Data for white women 18-29 and white men 18-29 weren’t reported."
https://news.vice.com/story/white-people-voted-to-elect-donald-trump
Boy when you see who they just elected as the chairman of their
party ...good grief...he is creepy looking. Looks like a
gypsy who runs the Ferris Wheel
at a fly by night carnival.
But Perez shows how wonderfully "diverse" the Democrats are. Being a Hispanic
whose parents were born in the Dominican Republic -- who could be better at
understanding what American voters want ?
Lawrence Akutagawa
2017-03-01 20:16:39 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by mg
The Democratic party has morphed into the black people's party and
the Republican party has become the white people's party.
"Whites vs. nonwhite voters
Whites made up 70 percent of voters
58 percent of all whites voted for Trump
21 percent of nonwhites voted for Trump
White men
White men made up 34 percent of voters
63 percent of them voted Trump
31 percent voted Clinton
White women
White women made up 37 percent of voters
53 percent of them voted Trump
43 percent voted Clinton
Young whites (ages 18-29)
Young white people made up 12 percent of voters
48 percent of them voted Trump
43 percent voted Clinton
In comparison, 9 percent of young blacks and 24 percent of young
Latinos voted for Trump.
College-educated whites
White college graduates made up 37 percent of voters
49 percent of them voted for Trump, while 45 percent voted for
Clinton.
54 percent of college-educated white men voted Trump.
45 percent of college-educated white women chose Trump, while 51
percent chose Clinton. This is the only white demographic tracked by
the exit poll that Trump didn’t win.
Non-college-educated whites
Whites without a college degree made up 34 percent of voters
67 percent of them voted for Trump
Of the women in this group, 62 percent voted for Trump
And men voted 72 percent for Trump
Data for white women 18-29 and white men 18-29 weren’t reported."
https://news.vice.com/story/white-people-voted-to-elect-donald-trump
Boy when you see who they just elected as the chairman of their
party ...good grief...he is creepy looking. Looks like a
gypsy who runs the Ferris Wheel
at a fly by night carnival.

***** This line separates my response from the foregoing ******

[chuckle]
Yet once again today does the Village Idiot entertain us with his crappy
crappy English!

Why, Village Idiot, are you with your abysmally abysmal English still in
this country?

Yet once again today does the Village Idiot (of course with "mutual
agreement") perform another Intellectual Coward ploy to run away from his
abysmally abysmal English, of course with his tail held high between his
legs, back into that deep dark dung filled hole of his under his rock!
Loading...