LaxPower Back-Up Stick

a fan wrote: ↑Tue Jan 21, 2020 2:19 pm

Bart wrote: ↑Tue Jan 21, 2020 1:20 pm Thank for this. In your estimation is it percentage per capita or total number? If my math is correct on the top 100 counties list you provided I get the following: (my math may be a bit off)
Total Number of Metro on SNAP: 1066168 or 64.16% of total in top 100
Total Number of Rural on SNAP: 595523 or 35.83% of total in top 100

Is it more telling the total percentage of a counties people are on SNAP or the total number? I do not know.

It's the percentage of residents on the program vs. residents that aren't on the program, expressed as a percentage.

But again---this is ONLY SNAP. This doesn't add in all the other programs that are sent their way that are specific to rural areas.

And remember, what has happened over the last few decades? When these rural resident finally give up economic hope? Where do they go?

That's right. Large cities like Baltimore Metro, where they can find work and fully functional charities.


Had this discussion with a guy at a dinner party the other day who lived on the western side of Colorado who thinks that his rural town is self-sufficient.

I asked him: why do we have States and Counties? Why not simply cities----all fending for themselves, and operating independently? He chuckled when he realized he was stuck, and knew EXACTLY why I asked the question.

The ENTIRE economy in the US is built-----literally built-----to pool resources and to to redistribute wealth. So the answer to my question is, we have the State of Colorado so that we can take money from Federal and State taxes, and redistribute them in the form of government services that benefits the State as a whole. And these taxes, obviously, start in large cities, and flow OUT to rural areas.

The problem is, we have a nation of voters who think that it's the other way around. What they think----and this is reinforced by FoxNation---- is that money starts in rural America, and flows to large metro areas, where it is spent by deadbeats who don't want to work. And these deadbeats socialists ONLY exist in large cities.

This is, of course, laughable on its face. And long time posters will know, I've explained this dozens of times for more than a decade.

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Tue Jan 21, 2020 3:48 pm It's also rather illuminating, as it certainly runs counter to the narrative many have assumed to be the case.

a fan wrote: ↑Tue Jan 21, 2020 4:38 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Tue Jan 21, 2020 3:48 pm It's also rather illuminating, as it certainly runs counter to the narrative many have assumed to be the case.

Nope. Government handouts and heavy borrowing...and now protectionist tariffs. Sorry, kids.

a fan wrote: ↑Tue Jan 21, 2020 4:57 pm If you're asking me? That would be THE single best thing we could do for this country.

Picture the announcement of the Iraq war with a balanced budget amendment. "Here's how much your taxes WILL go up if we choose to invade."

Decisions like these would be entirely different. Same goes for handouts and subsidies. It would make Americans THINK about our spending and taxation levels.

I'd LOVE to have a forced balanced budget.

a fan wrote: ↑Tue Jan 21, 2020 5:30 pm Yes. That number will be insignificant. But yes!

Peter Brown wrote: ↑Tue Jan 21, 2020 7:53 pm Why are these changes not more widely recognized? In part it reflects our penchant for bad news. In other words, you know it, orange man bad. The cure-all for the perma-complaining class.

a fan wrote: ↑Tue Jan 21, 2020 8:19 pm

Peter Brown wrote: ↑Tue Jan 21, 2020 7:53 pm Why are these changes not more widely recognized? In part it reflects our penchant for bad news. In other words, you know it, orange man bad. The cure-all for the perma-complaining class.

Maybe because this article is from 2016 when Trump wasn't President, and has nothing whatsoever to do with Trump.....even though you're trying desperately to link anything and everything to Trump?

Just a guess.

Peter Brown wrote: ↑Tue Jan 21, 2020 7:53 pm You probably don’t want to read this incredible and positive article about the state of the world if you’re a Democrat or neverTrumper. I’m always told the world stinks but it seems facts don’t support that thesis.

https://www.csmonitor.com/layout/set/am ... ssion=true

the world has reduced poverty, increased incomes, and improved health more than at any time in history

Why are these changes not more widely recognized? In part it reflects our penchant for bad news. In other words, you know it, orange man bad. The cure-all for the perma-complaining class.

Carry on.

holmes435 wrote: ↑Tue Jan 21, 2020 8:45 pm

a fan wrote: ↑Tue Jan 21, 2020 8:19 pm

Peter Brown wrote: ↑Tue Jan 21, 2020 7:53 pm Why are these changes not more widely recognized? In part it reflects our penchant for bad news. In other words, you know it, orange man bad. The cure-all for the perma-complaining class.

Maybe because this article is from 2016 when Trump wasn't President, and has nothing whatsoever to do with Trump.....even though you're trying desperately to link anything and everything to Trump?

Just a guess.

That's just fake news. All this good stuff happening was in anticipation of president Trump.

And we only invented "if it bleeds it leads" style news after Trump was elected as a reaction to him.

jhu72 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 22, 2020 8:27 am Nope, had plenty of problems before Trump. Trump didn't invent misogyny, homophobia, xenophobia, racism, stupidity, ignorance, corruption, greed or lying politicians.

jhu72 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 22, 2020 8:27 am Nope, had plenty of problems before Trump. Trump didn't invent misogyny, homophobia, xenophobia, racism, stupidity, ignorance, corruption, greed or lying politicians.

RedFromMI wrote: ↑Wed Jan 22, 2020 8:50 am

jhu72 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 22, 2020 8:27 am Nope, had plenty of problems before Trump. Trump didn't invent misogyny, homophobia, xenophobia, racism, stupidity, ignorance, corruption, greed or lying politicians.

He just helped perfect them...

Peter Brown wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 8:22 am And not to be left out of the conversation of course, Hil and Bill Clinton!, as they fly on a brand new G-650 compliments of the Saudi Arabian and Russian governments, tax-free alms sent into that incredible non-foundation Foundation private jet charter outfit, established on the premise that Hill and Bill would return every favor under the sun. Alas...the American people balked.

A shame.

kramerica.inc wrote: ↑Tue Jan 21, 2020 12:20 pm

holmes435 wrote: ↑Tue Jan 21, 2020 12:02 pm
Most of them?

Rural residents are more dependent on Food Stamps than urban residents to feed them.

Rural residents are poorer than urban residents. Do you think they're going to fancy private schools, or are they depending on the county to educate them at public schools.

Rural residents are less employed than urban residents, making them more dependent on things like government work programs, unemployment, welfare, food stamps, etc.

Rural residents have higher rates of disability, making them more dependent on Government disability payments.

I have enjoyed living in a small town of 10,000, and in some of the biggest cities in the country. There's great parts to both, but people shouldn't throw stones in glass houses.

I guess the problem is that most people don't know they're living in glass houses when they complain.

I anxiously await your reliable stats and numbers to back those claims up.

Not averages, numbers.

I mentioned a specific city- Baltimore. You mentioned general "most of them"

Just for giggles, which rural city are you thinking of?!