I encourage you to troll anyone Ayn-Rand-adjacent by sending them this image with the caption “Makers vs Takers” and then completely ignore every word of the long reply you receive
-
RE: https://mstdn.social/@DemocracyMattersALot/116868444258059787
I encourage you to troll anyone Ayn-Rand-adjacent by sending them this image with the caption “Makers vs Takers” and then completely ignore every word of the long reply you receive
@inthehands This is a graph of "Democrats feed on the rich". Ever had an email campaign or a spam SMS that the Democratic party would like to donate to you?
-
RE: https://mstdn.social/@DemocracyMattersALot/116868444258059787
I encourage you to troll anyone Ayn-Rand-adjacent by sending them this image with the caption “Makers vs Takers” and then completely ignore every word of the long reply you receive
It's always fun to tease right-wingers, of course, but the truth is that analyses like this make no sense - and note they are used by the right too, for example in the UK to show that poorer places are 'dependent' on the City of London.
The problem is that they don't tell you where income or wealth are actually generated - only where the taxes are paid. If an area has lots of corporate headquarters full of very highly paid people, or lots of rich landlords, it will collect more tax - but it might well have taken the income being taxed from plants or properties in areas that collect less tax.
The 'starvation' thing is also obviously absurd - people don't eat tax. You'd probably get a very different map if you looked at where food actually comes from.
-
It's always fun to tease right-wingers, of course, but the truth is that analyses like this make no sense - and note they are used by the right too, for example in the UK to show that poorer places are 'dependent' on the City of London.
The problem is that they don't tell you where income or wealth are actually generated - only where the taxes are paid. If an area has lots of corporate headquarters full of very highly paid people, or lots of rich landlords, it will collect more tax - but it might well have taken the income being taxed from plants or properties in areas that collect less tax.
The 'starvation' thing is also obviously absurd - people don't eat tax. You'd probably get a very different map if you looked at where food actually comes from.
@GeofCox @inthehands in the American case though it's a direct call out of hypocrisy. I follow British politics a little bit, though not much, but as far as I know you don't usually have as much of a political culture of rural conservative regions decrying more urban liberal regions for "welfare state" policies and in general overspending in a way that's implied to impact the national government while claiming conservative spending policies save money.
-
It's always fun to tease right-wingers, of course, but the truth is that analyses like this make no sense - and note they are used by the right too, for example in the UK to show that poorer places are 'dependent' on the City of London.
The problem is that they don't tell you where income or wealth are actually generated - only where the taxes are paid. If an area has lots of corporate headquarters full of very highly paid people, or lots of rich landlords, it will collect more tax - but it might well have taken the income being taxed from plants or properties in areas that collect less tax.
The 'starvation' thing is also obviously absurd - people don't eat tax. You'd probably get a very different map if you looked at where food actually comes from.
thing is, republicans are the party of cruelty
they would be fine with people starving next to vast bountiful farmland. it's the "i got mine, fuck you" culture
that states run by democrats take care of the poor in states run by republicans (mostly) is still a valid observation
-
@inthehands the original thread has some gems in it, like how this is likely #aislop and the coloring of blue and red implies a party bias, New Mexico is a safely blue state yet a lot of people would make the assumption that states like NM that take more federal funds than pay into it would therefore be conservative. It would also be stronger to have citations that people can actually look into as well as concrete numbers rather than just blanket labeling
NM is just an outlier
like north dakota is an outlier because of the bakken oilfields
the outliers don't disprove the general and truthful trend that blue states take care of the poor in red states, mostly
why do you feel the need to object to the generally truthful trend? why not just acknowledge it?
-
@inthehands also, I really don’t fucking like people who argue with other people about places THEY WERE BORN AND RAISED in.
Paul indicates they know of "Northern Colorado and Southern Wyoming"
so i don't know why you are objecting to their observations
i'm from connecticut but now live in western new york for many years. i think i can speak to life in western new york well enough. if someone would to be greatly offended at some of my observations this would indicate to me less that i don't know enough of the area, and more that i hit a nerve: the person doesn't like an uncomfortable truth
-
NM is just an outlier
like north dakota is an outlier because of the bakken oilfields
the outliers don't disprove the general and truthful trend that blue states take care of the poor in red states, mostly
why do you feel the need to object to the generally truthful trend? why not just acknowledge it?
@benroyce @inthehands I’m not disputing the claim, my very first reply aligns myself with the claim. I’ve been aware of this statistic many times for years. What I’m calling for is better sources from the get go instead of a visually misleading graphic that likely wasn’t even created by a person. Wouldn’t this graphic be more effective if it provided the actual numbers of contributing vs receiving funds? Wouldn’t this be more effective if it listed sources that it pulled from?
-
@benroyce @inthehands I’m not disputing the claim, my very first reply aligns myself with the claim. I’ve been aware of this statistic many times for years. What I’m calling for is better sources from the get go instead of a visually misleading graphic that likely wasn’t even created by a person. Wouldn’t this graphic be more effective if it provided the actual numbers of contributing vs receiving funds? Wouldn’t this be more effective if it listed sources that it pulled from?
i get you now
yeah i can agree we don't want ai slop or just sloppy charts and graphs
-
Paul indicates they know of "Northern Colorado and Southern Wyoming"
so i don't know why you are objecting to their observations
i'm from connecticut but now live in western new york for many years. i think i can speak to life in western new york well enough. if someone would to be greatly offended at some of my observations this would indicate to me less that i don't know enough of the area, and more that i hit a nerve: the person doesn't like an uncomfortable truth
@benroyce @inthehands No. You absolutely go FUCK yourself. Every other day someone is offended about some shit. They didn't gender me right, you can't say that, I'm offended and all you little cunts defend that. But if I AM offended for some jack ass calling MY HOME STATE a state of full of "homophobes and racists" when we're NOT, then "it's the uncomfortable truth"? GO FUCK YOURSELF. What? Just because we're a red state? Is that it? I can't be pissed because we're RED? Go fuck yourself.
-
@benroyce @inthehands No. You absolutely go FUCK yourself. Every other day someone is offended about some shit. They didn't gender me right, you can't say that, I'm offended and all you little cunts defend that. But if I AM offended for some jack ass calling MY HOME STATE a state of full of "homophobes and racists" when we're NOT, then "it's the uncomfortable truth"? GO FUCK YOURSELF. What? Just because we're a red state? Is that it? I can't be pissed because we're RED? Go fuck yourself.
currently i'm snacking so i'm unable to fuck myself
everywhere i've lived i've encountered bigots. it doesn't offend me as a matter of place where i am from if someone holds a negative opinion of that place, because all places have negative qualities
what is a tell though is how offended you get
why?
just admit wyoming has some douchebags. and good people, of course
then use your energy to convert the wyoming douchebags
rather than getting so upset people notice them
-
currently i'm snacking so i'm unable to fuck myself
everywhere i've lived i've encountered bigots. it doesn't offend me as a matter of place where i am from if someone holds a negative opinion of that place, because all places have negative qualities
what is a tell though is how offended you get
why?
just admit wyoming has some douchebags. and good people, of course
then use your energy to convert the wyoming douchebags
rather than getting so upset people notice them
@benroyce @inthehands yeah. Everywhere has douchebags. I’m looking at one. And I’m not going to do a mea culpa for defending my home state to appease your liberal ass.
-
@benroyce @inthehands yeah. Everywhere has douchebags. I’m looking at one. And I’m not going to do a mea culpa for defending my home state to appease your liberal ass.
i'm not a liberal
i am an ass though
anyway, like i said, the average well adjusted person can admit to the existence of douchebags in the place they live, because there's douchebags everywhere
meanwhile, someone dealing with some weird emotional denial and pride about the obvious, on the other hand, is working through some sort of cringe immaturity
but whatever
you do you dude
nobody really care that much. you're upset about nothing. you could try chilling out
-
J jwcph@helvede.net shared this topic
