9 of 10 Poorest States Are Republican

The topic is that they are Republican states. So what is the Republican Party doing to make them poor?

 

If you look at what the Southern Democrats were for then, and compare it to much of the GOP's approach of today, they're more similar than they are with the Democratic Party of today.

 

Keeping wages down, limiting educational opportunities, placing a larger tax burden on the poor and middle class with regressive tax policies while cutting taxes for the wealthiest. And (*)(*)(*)(*) poor trade policies (which in the last twenty years, I blame on both parties), that has had the result in moving manufacturing and good paying jobs out of the nation.

 

You are going to have to elaborate on that because I don't get it.

What could Republican states be doing that effects trade polices?

How are they "keeping wages down?"

How are they limiting educational opportunities?

And seriously? You are telling me that the tax burden is higher on the poor and middle class in Republican states than Democratic ones? You are going to have to bring some proof for that.

 

We WANT to be the party of the poor. But, in some places, poor goes hand in hand with redneck, bible thumpin', negro hatin', gay hatin', Ay-rab hatin', gun totin', conservatives who want nothing to do with the democratic party. Not much we democrats can do to be the party that those folks embrace.

- - - Updated - - -

and where blacks couldn't vote. Things change. Parties change. Poverty is pretty stubborn, though, isn't it?

 

My, my.. such bigotry and stereotyping. Making sure folks in the South stay down & poor is part of the Democrat's plan. Always has been.

 

electing Republican representatives and Senators to congress, who vote for job killing policies.

Most often, by using anti-labor tactics, to keep people from exercising their right to join unions freely, which results in a statistical result of lower wages and more poverty than free states.

mostly by underfunding public education, especially in poor and lower middle class neighborhoods/communities.

Regressive taxes are a de facto tax cut for the wealthiest people, and place a larger burden on the poor.

- - - Updated - - -

Not really. The poor are down because they've been electing conservatives for generations. Democrats were able to raise the standards of living for all amaericans, particularly the poor, and especially in the South, starting from the New Deal.

 

Interestingly, all, except Alaska and West Virginia are right-to-work (right-to-work-for-less) states which should also be factored in as well.

 

Nonsense. What Democrats have been able to do is raise the standard of poverty so more Americans qualify for govt handouts. Do you realize a person can make over $1000 a month today and qualify for food stamps, free cell phone, etc?

The Democrats goal is for everybody to be equally poor. They'll keep screwing with the numbers until they achieve that goal.

 

So much for the myth that the GOP is the party of the rich... it's actually the Democrats who attract the deep pockets that benefit from keeping poor folks poor.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/01/blue-billionaires-on-top-114151.html

 

poverty has been lessened since the advent of the New Deal and Great Society programs. And $1000/month is $250/week, and leaves that person in abject poverty, and malnourished and without shelter, all too often. Besides, putting money in the hands of the poor has a beneficial effect of increasing demand in the economy. The money still makes it into the hands of the wealthy, by increasing demand.

You're making up complete hogwash. The economy does better under Democrats than it does with Republicans leading the nation. And poverty is usually lessened, making the poor less poor, while the wealthy also do better with Democrats. The middle class grows as people leave poverty behind, and demand is increased with a larger base of consumers.

As opposed to the GOP, who would have all of us poor, except for a select few.

 

Your own link points out how GOP supporters would lead the pack if dark money donors would count. And, donors for the Democrats doesn't equate to their record of reducing poverty over the past 80+ years being erased.

 

Your source?

 

do you have a link to any published democratic "plan" that would support that allegation?

 

Now they vote GOP. I guess they got fed up with dems lynching them.

 

Prove that.

 

do you have anything in the world to back up this ridiculous assertion that blacks vote for the GOP in anything other than insignificantly small percentages?

 

Aren't the southern states red now? Do blacks live in the south? Logic 101 is in order here.

 

I figured you wouldn't be able to answer with any specificity, merely generalities that mean nothing. With the exception with your claim that the poor have a greater tax burden in Republican states than Democratic ones. However your link didn't show that. Of course your article didn't show that either. It had a list of in which states the bottom 20% paid the highest percentage of their income in taxes. Frankly, there wasn't much of a pattern between Republican and Democratic States. The State where the poor paid the highest amount in taxes was Washington; A very blue state. Number 2 was Florida, a purple trending blue state. At the bottom of the list in number 50, Vermont, the bluest of blue states. The 49th? South Carolina, about as red as can be. Nice try though.

 

http://www.livescience.com/34241-democratic-republican-parties-switch-platforms.html

 

I've seen your op-ed before. Thanks for not proving your point.

 

had you bothered to look at the general spending in the links, you might have seen tpwhere the evidence was leading. Sorry I didn't draw a map for you.

- - - Updated - - -

It gets to the history of the GOP of Lincoln, and how Democratic politics had a huge shift in the years after the start of the Great Depression.

 

As I said, you didn't prove your point. You're welcome to try again however. I'll have my red marker handy.

 

Yeah. Still one person's opinion.

 

they were also the slave owning states....


.