Is a "blue state" meltdown fast approaching?

How can Obama get a bailout for California past the Republican House, and soon the Republican Senate? Republicans want to see California crash and burn.

 

The congress has no control over the FED. They provide pseudo-"oversight", and a faux process of picking the board of governors. The FED is above the government. You will read one day in the paper, "FED bails out California", and that will be all she wrote.

 

California is going down no matter what. I don't think the Fed can help California. Check this out:
http://www.lvrj.com/opinion/california-dreamin-137165723.html

 

The FED simply has to push a button and it transfers. They can make it out of thin air. We will all be in debt with interest, just added on top. I don't care if it is 10 trillion in debt. What is sad is when I was a kid, California was so rich it, by itself, loaned Mexico 10 billion to develop its oil resources, which Mexico paid back with interest. My, how things change.

 

Then the Fed needs to be destroyed.

 

Hell, Al. We've been screaming that at the top of our lungs for awhile now.

 

I'm slow.

 

BS. The idea that teachers and professors as a group are the smartest in society is crap. A sheepskin doesn't mean intelligence, especially if its from the Education Dept.

But I am pleased to see you use the standard socialist approach to debate - if you don't agree with me, you are ignorant, uneducated, and unable to understand the error of your ways. Its the idea that the socialist way is the obvious way, and if only people heard the message then they would follow obediantly. And those that hear the message and reject it, well, they just aren't intelligent enough, there is something wrong with them, they just need to spend some time in the work camps for some re-education.

 

In all likelihood though, the Fed will continue to stand as it has for the past century. And they will most likely create this phony money to bail out the states, and save us from default . . . by subjecting us to hyperinflation.

Some choice.

 

The Fed will in all likelihood continue to stand as it has for the past century. And it is most probable that they will bail out the states with their magic money in order to save the nation and the world from another credit crisis . . . only to throw us into hyperinflation instead.

HOORAY!!!

 

I referred to how education leads to independent thought. That is certainly the case. Of course that isn't liked by some. Anti-intellectualism, for example, is actively encouraged in herd-motivation amongst the right wing (where a simple homogeneous sense of righteousness is required to reinforce conservative values)

 

My point is unchanged. Your claim is that education leads to independent thought which leads to socialist concepts. People that disagree with your politics - such as the "right wing" - are anti-intellectual and are brain washed. The purpose is two-fold. First, to provide an excuse to explain people that oppose your view - these people are defective. Second, to devalue people that disagree with socialism so the opposition is less than human, and that provides an excuse for the pogroms that will follow. Its straight out of the playbook used by Stalin, Mao, and Hitler. Convert or die.

 

I haven't mentioned socialism. Why are you making stuff up?

Anti-intellectualism is a classic aspect of the authoritarian personality (which, in psychological experiments, is very much linked to the right wing). Note also its very easy to find empirical support for the tendency towards a lack of individual thought. See, for example, DellaVigna and Kaplan (2007, The Fox News Effect: Media Bias and Voting, Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol 122, pp 1187-1234) and the Fox effect:

Does media bias affect voting? We analyze the entry of Fox News in cable markets and its impact on voting. Between October 1996 and November 2000, the conservative Fox News Channel was introduced in the cable programming of 20 percent of U. S. towns. Fox News availability in 2000 appears to be largely idiosyncratic, conditional on a set of controls. Using a data set of voting data for 9,256 towns, we investigate if Republicans gained vote share in towns where Fox News entered the cable market by the year 2000. We find a significant effect of the introduction of Fox News on the vote share in Presidential elections between 1996 and 2000. Republicans gained 0.4 to 0.7 percentage points in the towns that broadcast Fox News. Fox News also affected voter turnout and the Republican vote share in the Senate. Our estimates imply that Fox News convinced 3 to 28 percent of its viewers to vote Republican, depending on the audience measure. The Fox News effect could be a temporary learning effect for rational voters, or a permanent effect for non-rational voters subject to persuasion

Its mere objective study of the impact of education. You seem to find it threatening

 

That may be true in Britain, but not in the United States. America produces graduates who are generally unfit to compete with their foreign competitors. The reservoir of human capital is drying up in the US.

 

The problem with the US is actually the long tail of low skilled labour, encouraged by an Anglo-Saxon capitalism that provides for too much economic rent in low paid labour

 

There are lots of people with undergraduate degrees in the US who fall into the low skill category. They graduate and if they can find a job it is usually in a dead end job with no future that could be performed by uneducated illegal aliens.

 

A low skilled equilibrium is typically characterised by severe underemployment. You're just coming across as anti-American

 

You have a very good point.

 

Don't personalize our exchange.

 

Union capitulation & Cow tow-ing to Illegals will sink 3-7 states within 3 years

 

I'm just stating the nature of your posts. Attacking American skills, without any reference to the nature of the labour market and the constraints that exist, will always tend towards anti-American comment.

 

Well, you can't say I didn't warn you.

 

Democrats, progressives, socialists, communists, totalitarians, fascists .... interchangable, all from the same mold. Different mechanisms to accomplish the same agenda, personal power and control of the population.

DellaVigna and Kaplan - thats not proof. I read the report. They document that Republican voter turnout increased in areas in which Fox News was available. I believe that conclusion.

They insinuate that Fox News through intentional bias manipulated the 2000 election, Fox presented biased news to support an agenda of defeating democrats. Thats crap. There is nothing in the report except their own bias to support such a conclusion. Its just as reasonable to conclude that information affects people, Fox provided authentic news that other media outlets did not provide, and that additional information motivated people.

They come up with 3 possibilities to explain why conservative/Republican voter turnout increased in areas with Fox News.

Theory #1 - the study results are spurious. The authors reject this theory, they have data, and I believe them.

Theory #2 - higher conservative turnout is due to rational learning. They dismiss this out of hand claiming "This prediction relies on the exposure to Fox News between 1996 and 2000 being too short to precisely estimate the political bias of the media source." They assume that if people had a little more time, they would recognize the bias and reject conservative principles.

Theory #3 - people with conservative principles are stupid. "A third explanation is that viewers do not discount enough for media bias and are subject to non-rational persuasion. In this case, exposure to media slant systematically alters beliefs and voting behavior."

There is nothing in the data that eliminates theory #2. Its just as likely that Fox shed light on politics that the other media did not cover, and that additional information motivated thinking people to get involved.

Its also erroneous to assume that people will only watch Fox and ignore all other media sources - internet, magazines, newspapers, etc.

This report adds credence to my earlier point, that liberals/progressives/socialists hold the view that people with conservative beliefs either:

1 - are rational but misinformed and once properly informed, will shed all conservative concepts.

2 - are mentally substandard and subject to brain washing.

These authors cannot - even in a "scholarly" work - admit that people may hold conservative beliefs because they truly believe those concepts. Admitting that requires them to at least entertain the idea that their own dem/prog/soc philosophy is wrong.

 

That only tells me that you don't understand political economy. Fascism and liberalism, are quite incompatible.

It isn't just a turnout effect. Its a voting effect, demonstrating media influence. Liberalism isn't found to have the same impact. This probably reflects a greater heterogeneity in thought, together with a reduction in bounded rationality

There's a certain irony that you'd respond to comments over conservatives being misinformed with such crass errors over political ideology. As a socialist I know that my aims are inconsistent with liberalism. We'll share some beliefs, but typically that just reflects a joint disregard for authoritarianism that characterises the assorted left wing schools of thought

 

Can you provide a link that shows where the money goes?

Are you sure it goes to welfare, which makes up a small part of the Federal budget?