How Republican Craziness Is Undermining the South’s Massive Keynesian Stimulus

[SimpleDon]

Nobody said that's what "discussing" means either. Discussing the OP is discussing the OP not continuously bringing up irrelevant tangents.

You don't have to agree that republican voters voting to elect representatives that run on a platform of lowering the amount of federal spending that goes on in their states are stupid. You can argue that it's the eminently smart of them to vote for their state to get less federal money. Or we could discuss why red states which are typically run by republicans tend to be net takers of federal dollars when their platform is to shrink the federal government.

You started a thread about something being done that made someone look stupid or crazy. I made comments to the effect that that same thing made someone else look stupid or crazy.

Then you derailed the thread by making personal comments about me and my posting.

The blue states are not stupidly voting to transfer money from themselves to the red states. The blue states vote for the programs to take care of their own citizens. It is a fact that the citizens of red states are more in need of help than those in the blue states so that the net effect is money flowing from the blue states to the red states.

Why do you think that the red states have more people who need the help?

And do you think that the governors of the red states should be able to turn down more of the help that the federal government currently provides?

 

[dismal]

You started a thread about something being done that made someone look stupid or crazy. I made comments to the effect that that same thing made someone else look stupid or crazy.

Then you derailed the thread by making personal comments about me and my posting.

The blue states are not stupidly voting to transfer money from themselves to the red states. The blue states vote for the programs to take care of their own citizens. It is a fact that the citizens of red states are more in need of help than those in the blue states so that the net effect is money flowing from the blue states to the red states.

Why do you think that the red states have more people who need the help?

And do you think that the governors of the red states should be able to turn down more of the help that the federal government currently provides?

The real issue is why the blue stater's have so many 1%ers.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

The blue states are not stupidly voting to transfer money from themselves to the red states. The blue states vote for the programs to take care of their own citizens. It is a fact that the citizens of red states are more in need of help than those in the blue states so that the net effect is money flowing from the blue states to the red states.

Why do you think that the red states have more people who need the help?

And do you think that the governors of the red states should be able to turn down more of the help that the federal government currently provides?

The real issue is why the blue stater's have so many 1%ers.

Higher taxes.

 

[Rhea]

The real issue is why the blue stater's have so many 1%ers.

Higher taxes.

excellent answer.

 

[dismal]

Higher taxes.

excellent answer.

So if we want fewer 1%ers we should lower taxes?

Well, that's one problem solved.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

It seems to be. Billionaires don't seem to notice taxes. Maybe their accountants do.