Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Regurge on November 09, 2000, 06:38:00 PM
-
(http://plaza.ufl.edu/shamblin/785805.gif)
The national map follows pretty much the same trends except for good ol' Texas. Regardless of the current election i think we'll see Gore or possibly Hillary in the White House in 2004. That is unless someone manages to clone Reagan.
Whaddyall Texans think about becoming a separate republic again? We'd have plenty of gas and AH (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
[This message has been edited by Regurge (edited 11-09-2000).]
-
LOL! that'd almost get me to immigrate to the republic of Texas!
Hamish!
-
This trend furthers my personal belief that came up in other threads, like the "Don't HO" thread.
I think the people that live in higher population density areas feel a greater need to make their neighbors conform to a "standard". This fits in with the large government, "mother knows best", "we'll tell you what's good for you" Gore-type (notice I said "type") proposals.
Other people put greater value on individual freedoms and rights. I believe that the more rural, less densely populated areas match this mind set pretty closely. It's closer to a "Bush-type" agenda.
The voting map nationwide seems to support my personally held opinion.
YMMV. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
How about the idea that the university educated and business people in the cities voted for Gore and the Red-necks who married their cousin and watch Jerry Springer voted for Bush ? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/eek.gif)
Who would vote for someone who didn't get a job 'til he was 40 ? (as I understand it)
HEEEHEEEEEEE (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
<After dropping 5hit disturber bomb Snoopi pulls up and waits for the explosion>
No, I don't believe the stereotypes just trying to start a "discussion". (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
I think that's fair game Snoop - Toad brought it up. There's no doubt that there's a clear difference of opinion held by the rural and urban population. Toad gave his view, you gave yours. I happen to think there's alot of variables...and both of those views fall within' them.
-
I agree Nash.
You sound like you think the way I REALLY do.
I just usually like taking the contradictory side for the sake of arguement.
[This message has been edited by Snoopi (edited 11-10-2000).]
-
I think the people that live in higher population density areas feel a greater need to make their neighbors conform to a "standard". This fits in with the large government, "mother knows best", "we'll tell you what's good for you" Gore-type (notice I said "type") proposals.
Other people put greater value on individual freedoms and rights. I believe that the more rural, less densely populated areas match this mind set pretty closely. It's closer to a "Bush-type" agenda.
Excactly the opposite is true here in Finland:
In countryside everyone knows their neighbours and rumors start to run wild very fast about peoples. Folks that do not conform to majority do get in trouble. I know, I have lived 20 years in small village of 3500 peoples.
In cities it is different. Folks are more free to do what they want and live their lives like they want, without pressure from their neighbours. I know this also, I have lived in nice sized cities for 7 years.
Then there is also recent study that says better educated people move to cities after better jobs. I believe this trend is apparent in other countries also. This has been apparent in recent Finnish elections, one candidate gets huge percentage of their votes from countryside but almost none from cities.
My personal opinion is that city folks are usually better educated (high pay jobs are in cities in Finland) and they place more value for individiality and freedom.
------------------
jochen
Kids today! Why can't they fetishize Fascist military hardware like normal people?
Ladysmith wants you forthwith to come to her relief
Burn your briefs you leave for France tonight
Carefully cut the straps of the booby-traps and set the captives free
But don't shoot 'til you see her big blue eyes
-
Without addressing your totally unsupported assumption that urban areas contain more university educated/business people (well, I guess the crack dealers in downtown Detroit ARE businessmen and everyone in the NYC metroplex has a University degree (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif) ) as a percentage of the population than do rural areas.....
You are then making the case that University/business people somehow have better/more worthy life values than those who are in business for themselves or did not attend university?
-
LOL Toad... I agree.
Jochen:
In the USA, large cities are surrounded by vast seas of suburbia. The trend is for people to move OUT of the cities if they can, to the wealthier middle class neighborhoods... in contrast to Finland I would guess. The inner-cities are left with disadvantaged people who don't have the wherewithall to get out, and rely on the government for assistance. That is why American cities are liberal and democratic. The more advantaged and educated people are in the suburban sprawl between large cities.
-
You are then making the case that University/business people somehow have better/more worthy life values than those who are in business for themselves or did not attend university?
No, they are just different.
In the USA, large cities are surrounded by vast seas of suburbia. The trend is for people to move OUT of the cities if they can, to the wealthier middle class neighborhoods... in contrast to Finland I would guess. The inner-cities are left with disadvantaged people who don't have the wherewithall to get out, and rely on the government for assistance. That is why American cities are liberal and democratic. The more advantaged and educated people are in the suburban sprawl between large cities.
In Finland city centers are very wanted places to live and apartments in those areas are very expensive. Of course many live in suburbs near the cities too. I think city centers in Finland appears to be much more pleasant places than in US, maybe because even our largest cities are much smaller (Helsinki 500k, Tampere 200k, Turku 200k people).
I'm not sure about US but in Finland there is forming a definite split between rural and city areas. Cities draw people with higher education (naturally, industries are located near large cities) and other people are left in rural areas. This is also apparent in average wealth. Rural areas need much support from urban areas which is implemented by redirecting tax money.
This split is clear in all kind of elections. Greens and liberals tend to have more support in cities than they do in countryside, maybe because city people don't rely on government support as folks in rural areas.
Here is clip from Finland's largest newspaper:
http://www.helsinginsanomat.fi/uutisarkisto/19980201/erik/980201er00.html (http://www.helsinginsanomat.fi/uutisarkisto/19980201/erik/980201er00.html)
For those who are language challenged, they basically say that folks who has education and jobs are moving to cities of south and west coast of finland while those without job or in pension are left in other parts of finland.
------------------
jochen
Kids today! Why can't they fetishize Fascist military hardware like normal people?
Ladysmith wants you forthwith to come to her relief
Burn your briefs you leave for France tonight
Carefully cut the straps of the booby-traps and set the captives free
But don't shoot 'til you see her big blue eyes
-
Bottom line IMO is, the inner cities of America is where you have a larger population of minorities, and minorities benefit more from the Democratic platform than they do from the republican platform, thus, the larger votes in the inner cities for Gore.
-
Dudes,
Everybody benifits in an urban envirement from a democratic socioty. If you are unsocialized like a wild dog or something then you couldn't exist in a large city. I have never understood why people brag about their inability to be around other people. Has this become a bragging right?
As far as minorities are concerned I think they feel safer in an urban envirement because it is harder to be dragged behind a pickup truck with many people around.
And BTW small towns are by no means safe or free of scandall. Many serial killers have done quite well in small towns across the USA, Mostly White males. Really the biggest problem with people from small towns in lack of perspective. They have no real idea what life is like for minorities or people living in different countries, cities ext. but casting judgement on these people or places is pratically a past time. It is also the birthplace of many hate groups. The bottom line is that not all people in big cities like one another but we are not so foolish as to believe one or the other is more entitled to be there. People in small towns are very aware of who deserves to be on THIER land because they deserve it and they are REAL Americans. Forgetting that the real Americans were murdered so they could be there.
Perspective from your liberal friend
F4UDOA
-
Doesn't hold water,
Tampa (Hillsborough County) voted for Bush.
TWICE!!
Eagler
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort:
Bottom line IMO is, the inner cities of America is where you have a larger population of minorities, and minorities benefit more from the Democratic platform than they do from the republican platform, thus, the larger votes in the inner cities for Gore.
Exactly Rip ! Also you said that in a very politically correct manner (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Eagler
-
Toad: Nope not really saying anything in regards to business people(any.. not just university educated) or University educated people.
I was just throwing out the stereotype idea that people in the city are educated, and driving the economy, while the country folk are red-neck, uneducated, ignorant hicks who need farm handouts.
I DON'T believe that stereotype.
I was just trying to create some "discussion" and it seems to have done that. People don't seem to get into discussing things unless someone has a very opposite point of view.
In truth, I think the difference is that the people in the rural areas are not exposed to the need to get along with other people.
It is hard to have empathy or respect for other people, especially if they are "different", when you are not exposed to them and live an "insulated" life. Your neighbour could be 1 mile away.
This creates a "if you don't like it..%$#%$ you"..attitude.
Stereotypes, Racism etc. are increased by lack of exposure to people outside your "group".
Bush is perceived as right wing.
Gore is the moderate.
That is why I think the Gore/Bush split is the way it is demographics wise.
[This message has been edited by Snoopi (edited 11-10-2000).]
-
F4, there was a time, long ago, when you at least tried to argue without the inflammatory rhetoric.
Now you just try to inflame.
"Dragged behind a pickup"? Are you implying that racial hate crimes ONLY occur in rural areas?
"unsocialized like a wild dog"? Are you implying that if you don't want to live in a densely populated area then there is something wrong with your personality or mental health?
"Small towns are by no means safe"? Is the implication that densely populated areas have lower rates of violent crime? Or that all rural areas don't meet some arbitrary standard for "F4's Crime-Safe" list?
"real Americans were murdered so they could be there"? So the implication is that, world-wide, one should only occupy land that was held by your directly traceable ancestors who acquired it totally without violence or without running another human being off the land?
Jeez....how about some rational discussion out of you again?
-
Originally posted by Snoopi:
In truth, I think the difference is that the people in the rural areas are not exposed to the need to get along with other people.
It is hard to have empathy or respect for other people, especially if they are "different", when you are not exposed to them and live an "insulated" life. Your neighbour could be 1 mile away.
This creates a "if you don't like it..%$#%$ you"..attitude.
Stereotypes, Racism etc. are increased by lack of exposure to people outside your "group".
Bush is perceived as right wing.
Gore is the moderate.
That is why I think the Gore/Bush split is the way it is demographics wise.
[This message has been edited by Snoopi (edited 11-10-2000).]
LOL, did you really say that? Then perhaps I could say the same of people who live in big burough's! They are isolated and not able to get along with other people. Block after block of the same race or type person, some never leave the area. This creates a #!%$# you attitude. It creates a conformist attitude because your neighbor is 6 inches of plaster away. It fosters racism, and a lack of understanding for those who like rural settings.
It creates a group of people who want everyone else to conform to their limited view of the world, they get along so well, why should I be "different". There is hardly any violence in the places that supported Gore, lol.
Let me tell you something, it isn't rural america that can't get along with other people. Your statement is a fantasy. How about some real history with some real actions...You look at the Elian Gonzalas incident, what group of people wanted to ignore the Law? Look at the riots in LA, what group of people ignored the Law? Look at any major city you want, what group of people are responsible for the most violence? Look at aborotion, what group of people want that right? You bet I'll call the kettle black, minorities and women.
The major cities are really fostering hate, racism, and intolerence, not rural america. The democrats are catering to poeple whose idea of freedom is the ability to create a replica of their homeland within the USA and fill it with their own kind. At the same time they continue to act as though the problems created within those area's are somehow my fault.
Wrench
-
Toad,
Ok, lets try this again.
1. Unsocialized people behaive very much like unsocialized animals, IE. Ted Kazinski. What this type of person does is blame socioty/populated area's for their own personal failings. Hate groups tend to center around these same values. Like "All those Blacks, Spanish, Jews and Gay's live in the City" therefore it must be bad, dangerous whatever. People in cities don't have to like each other, we just accept that we are differant and move on. The anti-social personality will retreat from that situation blaming and hating the variety in culture for making them feel less of themselves.
2. Democratic politians favor cities- Yes but for different reasons than you think. Remember Clinton did the first major welfare reform in his first term. I am a democrat but I do not favor social welfare. The Democratic mayor of Philadelphia in 1992 serverly restricted access to welfare. What makes a Democratic government better for cities is making it easier for small business people to do business increasing the value of urban area's. Philadelphia was a prime example of urban blight and decay in the 80's. In the 90's the city has gone from being in debt to a surplus with new businesses all over the city and property values sky high.
"So the implication is that, world-wide, one should only occupy land that was held by your directly traceable ancestors who acquired it totally without violence or without running another human being off the land?"
Not at all. But in rural America there is an uprising of people(on this board as well) that think that minorities are less "american" than themselves. It is important to remember that we all belong here and that once you get through the door it doesn't close behind you.
And I didn't say that rural area's are less safe than urban area's. I am just saying that being the suburns doesn't gaurantee safety at all.
I do however believe that there is a hipocracy between Republican and Democratic beliefs even more so than urban vrs Rural.
For instance Ohio is very Republican and Cinncinati is the Republican mecca/urban envirement. Republicans claim to allow more personal freedom? Well you can buy a gun in Cinncinati but go try to buy a copy of "Hustler" magazine. You could wind up in jail. This is personal freedom? Sex kills but Guns save life's? That is the land of hipocracy if ever their was one.
BTW, Cinncinati is the most boring White bread town I have ever been.
I don't believe that was inflamatory.
Thanks
F4UDOA
-
Eagler, its obviously not an absolute rule, but look at the nation-wide map at the county level. Its pretty clear that Gore's support came from densely populated counties and Bush's came from a much greater number of smaller Counties.
Originally posted by F4UDOA:
Toad,
Ok, lets try this again.
1. Unsocialized people behaive very much like unsocialized animals, IE. Ted Kazinski. What this type of person does is blame socioty/populated area's for their own personal failings. Hate groups tend to center around these same values. Like "All those Blacks, Spanish, Jews and Gay's live in the City" therefore it must be bad, dangerous whatever. People in cities don't have to like each other, we just accept that we are differant and move on. The anti-social personality will retreat from that situation blaming and hating the variety in culture for making them feel less of themselves.
When did we start talking about unsocialized people? What does that have to do with the discussion? I hope you aren't implying that people who enjoy living in rural areas are unsocialized people like Kazinkski. Sure, people like him prefer to live in isolation, just as theives, drug dealers, pedophiles, and rapists prefer urban areas. You can find unsocialized people anywhere and they are rarely, if ever, representative of the population.
BTW, Cinncinati is the most boring White bread town I have ever been.
Thanks
F4UDOA
Since you capitalized the "W" i assume u meant White-bred, referring to the race, not the food.
Ever been to any Hispanic, Black or Asian towns? Have any negative opinions of them?
Is it ok if I say L.A. is the filthiest taco-town I have ever been?
[This message has been edited by Regurge (edited 11-10-2000).]
-
Originally posted by F4UDOA:
Toad,
Ok, lets try this again.
1. Unsocialized people behaive very much like unsocialized animals, IE. Ted Kazinski. What this type of person does is blame socioty/populated area's for their own personal failings. Hate groups tend to center around these same values. Like "All those Blacks, Spanish, Jews and Gay's live in the City" therefore it must be bad, dangerous whatever. People in cities don't have to like each other, we just accept that we are differant and move on. The anti-social personality will retreat from that situation blaming and hating the variety in culture for making them feel less of themselves.
Oh yeah, thats right, Jeffery Dahmer was just a simple Wisconsin sharecropper in Milwaukee to buy some seed when he decided to eat everybody. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
Daniel Boone had it right when he complained it was getting too crowded in Tennessee. He didn't like it that his nearest neighbor was now only 40 miles away.
F4UDOA you are hilarious. I guess living like rats in an overcrowded cesspool has no effect on mental health??
I reckon all those people walking down Santa Monica Blvd. mumbling to themselves, are actually carrying-on normal conversations.
I like certain cities for occasional fun, but i'm glad as hell i don't live in one. And, out here in God's Country, i certainly don't want to be dictated-to by a bunch of pencil-necked, effete geeks in NYC or Wash. DC.
Cabby
[This message has been edited by cabby (edited 11-10-2000).]
-
Wrench:
I agree that large cities that have neighbourhoods with specific groups living in them that isolate themselves are a problem too. When a city gets too big, people have a tendency to "circle the wagons" as a defense mechanism.
Then again....
Small U.S. rural racist southern towns ? I guess that isn't real ?
I guess bible thumping moralists don't have a stronghold in the rural areas ?
I guess the groups in the country with enough weapons to take over a small country are a fantasy ?
Just walk in a small town bar where no one knows you and notice the initial reception you get.
NOW DON"T GET ME WRONG.
MY IN-LAWS ARE FARMERS.
I WANT TO MOVE OUTSIDE THE CITY FOR SOME PEACE AND QUIET. I PREFER THE COUNTRY OVER THE CITY.
The rural bull^%$ is created by being isolated. The city crap on the other hand is created by too many people living close together.
I never said there was no violence in urban areas. The U.S. is full of violence everywhere.
You stated:
"Look at aborotion, what group of people want that right? You bet I'll call the kettle black, minorities and women."
Of course women want abortion rights.. it is their body, they can do what they want with it. Yeah a great man gets her pregnant and then leaves immediately or a man rapes a woman. I guess she should keep the kid ?
and..
"..poeple whose idea of freedom is the ability to create a replica of their homeland within the USA and fill it with their own kind."
Hmmm.. Just what the english did when they colonized America ?
Their own kind ? What KIND ? Humans ?
At the same time they continue to act as though the problems created within those area's are somehow my fault.
I don't think "THEY" act like it's your fault.
What makes you think so ?
Thinking about what I originally posted...
I guess my mistake was typing while thinking of my environment not the U.S., when I should have analyzed my thoughts and made sure It applied to the U.S.
U.S. cities are much larger, on average, than Canadian cities therefore they have more @#$%. In addition, minorities are generally well accepted in Canada. That goes back to when U.S. slave took refuge here and American Indians sought refuge from the likes of Custer.
Next time I post I'll hopefully be running on more than 5 hours sleep a night. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
HBLAIR:
Naw... Dahmer was only in the city because that way he had more to eat. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/eek.gif)
Regards All ! Time for me to sleep for once.
[This message has been edited by Snoopi (edited 11-10-2000).]
-
But F4U....most Catholic churches are in larger cities... (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
[This message has been edited by Fatty (edited 11-10-2000).]
-
Originally posted by Snoopi:
Wrench:
Then again....
Small U.S. rural racist southern towns ? I guess that isn't real ?
I guess bible thumping moralists don't have a stronghold in the rural areas ?
I guess the groups in the country with enough weapons to take over a small country are a fantasy ?
Wooaaa!
Hold on there, buddy.
Ever been to Alabama? Sure, we have our idiots, but time does advance forward, you know, and people here have changed to a great degree.
Did you know Birmingham, AL has had a black mayor for the past twenty years now? Selma just elected a black mayor. There is a civil rights museum in Birmingham commemorating the civil rights struggle of the 60's era. A popular place for blacks and whites.
It's been at least 35 years since you've seen an Alabama state trooper beating a black man on tv, but you get a dose of it almost yearly from such forward thinking, progressive cities such as Los Angeles, Philadelphia, & Boston.
I'm sick of simple minded people saying southern rural people are all ignorant racists, just because they just watched "Mississippi Burning". Its time to get educated and quit taking cheap shots. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
[This message has been edited by hblair (edited 11-10-2000).]
-
Speaking of campaign managar Daley and racism....ah nevermind. Forget Chicago. Point made for those that know.
-
Hblair I didn't say ALL southern rural towns or townsfolk are like that.
Generalizations are stupid and I avoid, ever saying ALL <blank> are <blank>.
Wrench stated: "The major cities are really fostering hate, racism, and intolerence, not rural america"
My point was that the rural areas are not just "apple pie".
My In-Laws are deeply spiritual people that actually walk the walk.
They work hard on their small farm and have "common sense". (a misnomer if there ever was one).
They are the kind of people that improve the world. But there are also rednecks out there too.
There are the gangmembers in the cities and there are the families who contribute to the city and not just take from it.
I have been in every state in the union except Hawaii, and that seems to hold true in every one of them.
But I still believe that people in rural areas are not as exposed to as many religions,races,sexual preferences, cultures etc. as those in the city.
Lack of exposure causes lack of understanding.
Something akin to a person who comes from a well middle class family looking at a person and saying "Get A Job You Bum".
In his world, all you had to do was go to university, get a degree, and become the stockbroker. No bumps in HIS road.
He can't understand why a man would be sleeping on a bench unless he was lazy.
But...surprise..the guy on the bench was once a university professor before his family was killed in a accident, that left him with brain damage that causes occasional, temporary speech and memory problems.
Every job he had since, he was fired from.
He is intelligent but people don't like having to "deal" with his problem so he is now at the bottom of society.
(This is a true story about someone I knew)
Regards,
Snoopi
[This message has been edited by Snoopi (edited 11-11-2000).]
-
Despite the true stories people may know about both sides, the fact is a town of 10,000 needs little or no government at all to run smoothly, while a city of 10,000,000 must have an immense infrastructure.
This leads to completely different, yet accurate from their POV, views of government and the need for an electoral college type system to keep either side from outvoicing the other.
-
Hblair,
Jeffry Dahmer was born and raised in a rural community and moved to Chicago. I have seen his profile on A&E's Crime and Punishment.
Cabby,
You should go to New York and and start calling people pencil neck Geeks. I'm sure they will have allot of fun showing you around town.
Reurge,
Thanks for pointing out my spelling error. You sure are smart. Anyway you almost understand what white-BRED means. It is a lack of culture not race. There is an Italian resturaunt in Cinncinati called Italiano's. They they now as much about Italian food as I do about cattle. The food in general is somewere between Bob Evans and Denny's. The Buildings are all flat roofs, strip malls. The Mid-west at it's best/worst. When you get a chance to visit someplace where the culture goes beyond the Sears catalog you will understand. Nothing personal, just preferance. Go to Europe one day and get some contrast. I prefer to be somewhere in between the two. Like NY, NJ, Philly.
Later
F4UDOA
[This message has been edited by F4UDOA (edited 11-11-2000).]
-
F4U, just what exactly is your opinion of those of us that live out in the country or in small towns?
You make alot of vague allusions to rural people being racist, psychopathic, anti-social, uncultured rednecks. I just want to know if thats really what you think.
-
F4U, come back to earth man. You'll find idiots all over the place in any city, and idiots all over the place in any rural area (as evident in this thread). Yes, in Europe too.
-
Originally posted by Snoopi:
How about the idea that the university educated and business people in the cities voted for Gore and the Red-necks who married their cousin and watch Jerry Springer voted for Bush ? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/eek.gif)
How about the idea that all the welfare-dependent people live in the cities, and they want more government support at the expense of the rest of the country? Thats a more plausible explanation.
------------------
LJK_Raubvogel
LuftJägerKorps (http://www.luftjagerkorps.com)
-
Regurge,
I don't have any problem with anyone from anywhere. Except the people who make comments on this board about the people in cities voting for Gore who are "less American" or are to "stupid". I am pointing out that there are wacko's in all area's and that all American's have a right for their vote to be counted regardless of their ethnic background or where they live.
If you need evidence of my statement just check the long list of topics on this board. Karnak and I are to of the most vocal Democrats on the boards. So it is a full time job just replying to some of the stuff on them. I apologize if I seem offensive, but it is hard not to be when being attacked by a group of people who's opinions go from conservative to right wing.
Later
F4UDOA
Fatty, I agree.
[This message has been edited by F4UDOA (edited 11-11-2000).]
-
I like Bob Evans. If you don't like it, that's cool. But don't kid yourself, it doesn't make you superior.
If you're saying the Midwest has an absence of culture, I'd say you have an absence of grey matter. There is a lot more to culture than fancy restaurants.
[This message has been edited by funked (edited 11-11-2000).]
-
Fatty:
In regards to infrastucture needs causing different points of view...I think that is part of the story.
In Regards to "idiots being everywhere"
I agree wholeheartedly.
Trying to pin this to 1 specific cause is nuts. MANY factors are probably involved.
Education level,political upbringing (the main factor ?),exposure to other groups,need for government assistance, country of birth, etc. etc. etc.
Rural vs Urban points of view are different and for anyone to say that one is better than the other is ludicrous.
Raubvogel:
Nice Generalization ! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
(Please realize that I don't believe that. As I said, I just posted it to create discussion)
Hmmm... All welfare dependent people live in the cities ?
Ever hard of Farm Aid ?
They've spent $14.5 million dollars in aid to farmers. (sounds like welfare to me)
As for the U.S. government.....
$5.5 billion for supplemental payments to commodities producers;
$125 million for additional payments to dairy producers;
$1.2 billion for crop loss assistance, under a program similar to the single year crop loss disaster assistance program of 1998;
$328 million in payments to tobacco producers;
A doubling of the payment limitation for loan deficiency payments and marketing loan
gains from $75,000 to $150,000, applicable only to the 1999 crop year;
$475 million in payments to oilseed producers, based on 1997 or 1998 production, except for new producers and;
$200 million for livestock producers for losses resulting from natural disasters.
Hmm.. yeah the farmers who keep rural towns alive don't get ANY help from the government.
The above stats, from the U.S. Farm Service Agency, sound like welfare to me.
Who is paying for that ??? well...
"According to preliminary data released by the Internal Revenue Service, the top-earning one percent of U.S. taxpayers (annual income over $250,736) made 17.4 percent of the income earned in 1997 and paid 33.2 percent of the total federal individual income taxes collected that year."
Those numbers have no doubt changed since 1997, but....
Where do Bill Gates, Ted Turner etc. live ??
In the city.
Where do the yuppies who make the high income and pay the high taxes live ? In the city.
[This message has been edited by Snoopi (edited 11-11-2000).]