Why does the poor south vote conservative?
There is a question that has puzzled some sociologists for years: If America’s poverty is concentrated in the South, as data clearly show, why is it that those states are the most reliably Republican voters – essentially voting against the government assistance they would seem to need?
This week, there emerged a new and seemingly unrelated question, though similarly perplexing: Why has the mortality rate for middle age white Americans gone up dramatically since 1999 – even as it has gone down for other groups of Americans and whites in other countries?
The study released this week by the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences found that the surprising rise in middle-age, white mortality in America from 1999 to 2013 was driven by a rise in suicide, drug abuse, and alcoholism. The trends were strongest among those with the least education and in the predominantly red South and West, with the authors suggesting a vicious cycle of physical pain and addiction to painkillers, compounded by fiscal uncertainty.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/americas-red-state-crisis-231355002.html
Comments
-
Because Jesus
-
Jesus cooked meth for the poor
-
There is a question that has puzzled some sociologists for years: If America’s poverty is concentrated in the South, as data clearly show, why is it that those states are the most reliably Republican voters – essentially voting against the government assistance they would seem to need?
So government assistance is the way to not be poor. I think we found the answer to your question. They may be dumb but they are clearly smarter than you
HTH -
It's almost as if maybe some people have principles....ya know, like hey, maybe it's wrong to force people to pay into something for my benefit. And then it's almost as if people are prioritizing their principles over getting "free" stuff when they vote.
Sociologists aren't puzzled. They're pissed that democracy isn't working the way they want it too. Be dependent, dammit! -
Famous Quote from Benjamin Franklin
"When the people find they can vote themselves money,
that will herald the end of the republic." -
Principles. El oh el. They take handouts just like other poor people. But they think it's ok because they deserve it. They're hypocrites.Fenderbender123 said:It's almost as if maybe some people have principles....ya know, like hey, maybe it's wrong to force people to pay into something for my benefit. And then it's almost as if people are prioritizing their principles over getting "free" stuff when they vote.
Sociologists aren't puzzled. They're pissed that democracy isn't working the way they want it too. Be dependent, dammit! -
Well I'm not denying that many of them are hypocrites. Many of them do take handouts. But they still preach the principle.allpurpleallgold said:
Principles. El oh el. They take handouts just like other poor people. But they think it's ok because they deserve it. They're hypocrites.Fenderbender123 said:It's almost as if maybe some people have principles....ya know, like hey, maybe it's wrong to force people to pay into something for my benefit. And then it's almost as if people are prioritizing their principles over getting "free" stuff when they vote.
Sociologists aren't puzzled. They're pissed that democracy isn't working the way they want it too. Be dependent, dammit! -
...as opposed to those liberal, urban, welfare havens in Chicago, Detroit, New York, Washington DC, Philadelphia, Baltimore.....You know, those Northern cities where 20% of the entire population of the US live. No poverty/crime there, just good old fashioned American values and clean living.
-
Everybody does it.HuskyInAZ said:...as opposed to those liberal, urban, welfare havens in Chicago, Detroit, New York, Washington DC, Philadelphia, Baltimore.....You know, those Northern cities where 20% of the entire population of the US live. No poverty/crime there, just good old fashioned American values and clean living.
-
I tell people not to beat their wives. I beat my wife. Applaud me for preaching the principle.Fenderbender123 said:
Well I'm not denying that many of them are hypocrites. Many of them do take handouts. But they still preach the principle.allpurpleallgold said:
Principles. El oh el. They take handouts just like other poor people. But they think it's ok because they deserve it. They're hypocrites.Fenderbender123 said:It's almost as if maybe some people have principles....ya know, like hey, maybe it's wrong to force people to pay into something for my benefit. And then it's almost as if people are prioritizing their principles over getting "free" stuff when they vote.
Sociologists aren't puzzled. They're pissed that democracy isn't working the way they want it too. Be dependent, dammit! -
Liberals help the poor. Everybody says so.
-
Liberals care about the poor. Some of our efforts to help them may be misguided but the effort is there. I would not say that about conservatives.
-
I think Social Security is a terribly flawed system. I have paid into that system my entire working life, despite voting against it and other entitlement programs. If by some random chance I get disabled beyond my ability to work and Social Security still has money to payout, I'll certainly take the benefits that I've spent years paying for. If that makes me a hypocrite oh well.
In the same way most of the people protesting the po-lice these days will almost certainly end up receiving help (directly or indirectly) from the popos at some point in the future doesn't make them hypocrites. Receiving benefit from a flawed system doesn't mean you have to endorse said flawed system. -
I was with you in the 1st paragraph. Although a flawed system, if you need it social security, by all means, use it. That's why it there. If you don't need it, support those who do need it. I'm with ya.dnc said:I think Social Security is a terribly flawed system. I have paid into that system my entire working life, despite voting against it and other entitlement programs. If by some random chance I get disabled beyond my ability to work and Social Security still has money to payout, I'll certainly take the benefits that I've spent years paying for. If that makes me a hypocrite oh well.
In the same way most of the people protesting the po-lice these days will almost certainly end up receiving help (directly or indirectly) from the popos at some point in the future doesn't make them hypocrites. Receiving benefit from a flawed system doesn't mean you have to endorse said flawed system.
The 2nd paragraph, not so much. It seems to me that the only people who have problems with the police are those who break the law. Law abiding citizens have no problem with law enforcement. Exactly how is it a flawed system? -
This guy.HuskyInAZ said:
I was with you in the 1st paragraph. Although a flawed system, if you need it social security, by all means, use it. That's why it there. If you don't need it, support those who do need it. I'm with ya.dnc said:I think Social Security is a terribly flawed system. I have paid into that system my entire working life, despite voting against it and other entitlement programs. If by some random chance I get disabled beyond my ability to work and Social Security still has money to payout, I'll certainly take the benefits that I've spent years paying for. If that makes me a hypocrite oh well.
In the same way most of the people protesting the po-lice these days will almost certainly end up receiving help (directly or indirectly) from the popos at some point in the future doesn't make them hypocrites. Receiving benefit from a flawed system doesn't mean you have to endorse said flawed system.
The 2nd paragraph, not so much. It seems to me that the only people who have problems with the police are those who break the law. Law abiding citizens have no problem with law enforcement. Exactly how is it a flawed system? -
I was at a food bank fundraiser breakfast this morning, and I actually thought about this very thing.allpurpleallgold said:Liberals care about the poor. Some of our efforts to help them may be misguided but the effort is there. I would not say that about conservatives.
The liberals are the ones who are thought of as the ones that help the poor, yet the venue that donated their space and time to host the event was a church. And the vast majority of the 500 or so folks there to donate to the food bank were old time right wingers from the neighborhood.
Weird, I didn't see many young left wing hipsters there anywhere. -
get right the fuck outta here with this shit.HuskyInAZ said:
The 2nd paragraph, not so much. It seems to me that the only people who have problems with the police are those who break the law. Law abiding citizens have no problem with law enforcement. Exactly how is it a flawed system?dnc said:I think Social Security is a terribly flawed system. I have paid into that system my entire working life, despite voting against it and other entitlement programs. If by some random chance I get disabled beyond my ability to work and Social Security still has money to payout, I'll certainly take the benefits that I've spent years paying for. If that makes me a hypocrite oh well.
In the same way most of the people protesting the po-lice these days will almost certainly end up receiving help (directly or indirectly) from the popos at some point in the future doesn't make them hypocrites. Receiving benefit from a flawed system doesn't mean you have to endorse said flawed system.
-
our?allpurpleallgold said:Liberals care about the poor. Some of our efforts to help them may be misguided but the effort is there. I would not say that about conservatives.
-
You don't get credit when you're working an angle. When it's to impress God or for tax purposes or to convert then you are not giving to charity. You are providing something with an expectation of getting something in return. That's why they have a problem with it being done with tax dollars. Not because they don't get to choose to give but because they don't get anything out of it.Alexis said:
I was at a food bank fundraiser breakfast this morning, and I actually thought about this very thing.allpurpleallgold said:Liberals care about the poor. Some of our efforts to help them may be misguided but the effort is there. I would not say that about conservatives.
The liberals are the ones who are thought of as the ones that help the poor, yet the venue that donated their space and time to host the event was a church. And the vast majority of the 500 or so folks there to donate to the food bank were old time right wingers from the neighborhood.
Weird, I didn't see many young left wing hipsters there anywhere. -
You paid into it. I wouldn't call you a hypocrite. Calling "them" the "takers" while receiving food stamps is not the same thing.dnc said:I think Social Security is a terribly flawed system. I have paid into that system my entire working life, despite voting against it and other entitlement programs. If by some random chance I get disabled beyond my ability to work and Social Security still has money to payout, I'll certainly take the benefits that I've spent years paying for. If that makes me a hypocrite oh well.
In the same way most of the people protesting the po-lice these days will almost certainly end up receiving help (directly or indirectly) from the popos at some point in the future doesn't make them hypocrites. Receiving benefit from a flawed system doesn't mean you have to endorse said flawed system. -
I'm an atheist, so I don't give a shit about churches but he isn't wrong, most charity work in this nation and most of the help the people in poverty get is from church goers.
And while they may be misguided fools for believing in god/gods, it is awfully cynical of you to make the statement they are all doing it for taxes or to get into "heaven".
I think they do it because it's common human decency and they want to make a difference however they can. -
Police officers are human beings, so there are bad apples among them like any other group. And you are awfully naive if you think the only people to ever run into trouble with the law are law breakers.HuskyInAZ said:
I was with you in the 1st paragraph. Although a flawed system, if you need it social security, by all means, use it. That's why it there. If you don't need it, support those who do need it. I'm with ya.dnc said:I think Social Security is a terribly flawed system. I have paid into that system my entire working life, despite voting against it and other entitlement programs. If by some random chance I get disabled beyond my ability to work and Social Security still has money to payout, I'll certainly take the benefits that I've spent years paying for. If that makes me a hypocrite oh well.
In the same way most of the people protesting the po-lice these days will almost certainly end up receiving help (directly or indirectly) from the popos at some point in the future doesn't make them hypocrites. Receiving benefit from a flawed system doesn't mean you have to endorse said flawed system.
The 2nd paragraph, not so much. It seems to me that the only people who have problems with the police are those who break the law. Law abiding citizens have no problem with law enforcement. Exactly how is it a flawed system?
FFS. -
Disagree.PurpleReign said:I'm an atheist, so I don't give a shit about churches but he isn't wrong, most charity work in this nation and most of the help the people in poverty get is from church goers.
And while they may be misguided fools for believing in god/gods, it is awfully cynical of you to make the statement they are all doing it for taxes or to get into "heaven".
I think they do it because it's common human decency and they want to make a difference however they can.
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2013/11/28/are-religious-people-really-more-generous-than-atheists-a-new-study-puts-that-myth-to-rest/ -
Friendly Atheist is your source?allpurpleallgold said:
Disagree.PurpleReign said:I'm an atheist, so I don't give a shit about churches but he isn't wrong, most charity work in this nation and most of the help the people in poverty get is from church goers.
And while they may be misguided fools for believing in god/gods, it is awfully cynical of you to make the statement they are all doing it for taxes or to get into "heaven".
I think they do it because it's common human decency and they want to make a difference however they can.
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2013/11/28/are-religious-people-really-more-generous-than-atheists-a-new-study-puts-that-myth-to-rest/ -
Sounds like conservatives do care but they don't do it the right way.
We need public assistance but it won't raise you out of poverty. Claiming poor folks should vote for Democrats based on welfare is stupid.
Welfare will be with us always. Providing the best opportunities to get off it is what you should base your vote on.
Nobody wants to be on free shit. It's dehumanizing and pays like shit. They want a good job and life like we (?) do. -
Race will be pissed when he realizes that comment by that author was a parody of people like race, death, and the right wing media.RaceBannon said:There is a question that has puzzled some sociologists for years: If America’s poverty is concentrated in the South, as data clearly show, why is it that those states are the most reliably Republican voters – essentially voting against the government assistance they would seem to need?
So government assistance is the way to not be poor. I think we found the answer to your question. They may be dumb but they are clearly smarter than you
HTH -
Do you believe everything you read on the Internet?
-
Holy shit Race, you actually said something I agree with. The problem is, Republicans have built a platform on "the 47% that pay no taxes will never vote for a Republican."RaceBannon said:Sounds like conservatives do care but they don't do it the right way.
We need public assistance but it won't raise you out of poverty. Claiming poor folks should vote for Democrats based on welfare is stupid.
Welfare will be with us always. Providing the best opportunities to get off it is what you should base your vote on.
Nobody wants to be on free shit. It's dehumanizing and pays like shit. They want a good job and life like we (?) do.
And don't come back crying that Democrats have built a platform of giving everything away for free. Read the actual platform. -
Why would I do that?2001400ex said:
Holy shit Race, you actually said something I agree with. The problem is, Republicans have built a platform on "the 47% that pay no taxes will never vote for a Republican."RaceBannon said:Sounds like conservatives do care but they don't do it the right way.
We need public assistance but it won't raise you out of poverty. Claiming poor folks should vote for Democrats based on welfare is stupid.
Welfare will be with us always. Providing the best opportunities to get off it is what you should base your vote on.
Nobody wants to be on free shit. It's dehumanizing and pays like shit. They want a good job and life like we (?) do.
And don't come back crying that Democrats have built a platform of giving everything away for free. Read the actual platform. -
Im not discussing what does and doesn't deserve an applause. Just telling you what drives a poor person to vote conservative.allpurpleallgold said:
I tell people not to beat their wives. I beat my wife. Applaud me for preaching the principle.Fenderbender123 said:
Well I'm not denying that many of them are hypocrites. Many of them do take handouts. But they still preach the principle.allpurpleallgold said:
Principles. El oh el. They take handouts just like other poor people. But they think it's ok because they deserve it. They're hypocrites.Fenderbender123 said:It's almost as if maybe some people have principles....ya know, like hey, maybe it's wrong to force people to pay into something for my benefit. And then it's almost as if people are prioritizing their principles over getting "free" stuff when they vote.
Sociologists aren't puzzled. They're pissed that democracy isn't working the way they want it too. Be dependent, dammit!
