I think we should do an EMP burst over silicon valley and in 39 years they'll be complaining about no hi tech jobs
Us normal people that live in Colorado call Boulder "The Republic of Boulder" for a very specific reason as it does NOT represent the rest of the state. With your gloating of Boulder, you forgot the mention that Boulder is 81% white and less than 3% of the population is black and and most middle to low income families CANNOT live in Boulder due to the absorbent cost of living. If you wanted to compare a true blue city, let's look at Chicago and then lets compare, shall we?
You are contradicting your compatriots. The conservative narrative says that liberals move in and drag the neighborhood down. Which is kind of silly. Which, of course is what you are here expressing. Portland is a fine example. The locals are on the dumb side. Something like only 70% graduate high school. Then they brought in Intel, Excite and On, bringing in an influx of highly educated scientists and engineers, who just so happen to lean liberal. It caused a divide in Portland, gentrification that forced many into homelessness. It is kind of the problem with high tech, there are no jobs for the uneducated.
You seem to have what I call, a racist view of liberalism. Let me fill you in with the details. Liberalism is a product of Northern European thought. It is where it began, and where it is most strong. Liberalism gave us the tools and mindset to develop modernity. No where else in the world has this occured. Liberalism is the most purely white Northern European ideology. Liberalism is what gave us electrical lighting in our homes, and computers to entertain ourselves with. Liberalism is the ideology of intellectuals. It is why only 20% of the country is liberal, there seems to be an intellectual barrier, that tends to leave the uneducated out. The primary reason that Blacks vote Democratic, is because too many Republicans refuse to treat them as equals, or even treat them respectably. From my point of view, liberalism is the ideology of white intellectuals. In every hub of innovation, in the US, which are all highly liberal, a defining characteristic is college educated and white. Yet you want to characterise liberalism as poor Blacks. Actually Chicago is two cities. On the north side, there is a high concentration of college educated whites, but for some reason, conservatives tend to ignore them. Still, you can find no conservative area that comes close to the success of Boulder.
Such a mishmash of false thinking. Let me start off with your racism, to claim that Republicans don't treat blacks as equals and then turn around and say that the defining characteristic of hubs of innovation are white, college-educated people. You might want to talk to Tokyo about that. https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/10/5-japanese-innovations-that-changed-the-world/ Second, liberalism did not start in northern Europe. Liberalism, such as it is, has always existed, and is found much more readily in southern Europe and the rest of the world. Northern Europe started the idea of capitalism, free markets, and free people. These are fundamentally conservative ideas. Liberalism is the idea of the commonality taking precedence over the individual, the idea of "share and share alike". It is a fundamentally illiberal idea. Third, it was conservatism that originated in northern Europe, starting with the Protestant Reformation. It was conservatism that gave us the idea that the individual had rights that take precedence over the collective, the state, the church. It was John Locke who gave us the idea that individuals had rights that kings and priests could not take away. It was Adam Smith who gave us the idea that free markets generated wealth and not the state, not gold. Fourth, liberalism did not give us any of those things. All of those things came from capitalists and capitalism. They didn't originate in liberal countries, they originated in the US, the most capitalistic country in world history, though we have moved far from that position lately. Liberalism gives nothing but misery and poverty. Fifth, liberalism does not leave out the uneducated. In fact, most of the world's uneducated are liberal, in the sense that they want **** given to them free of charge, at other people's expense. Liberalism is the desire to get that which you haven't earned, taken from those who have earned it. And it is very common among those who have nothing. AOC is very much a liberal, and she is thoroughly uneducated, despite her college degree. Historically speaking, nothing is more ancient than the liberal idea that "what's yours is mine if I can take it from you." It is the conservative idea that is much more recent, that originated in white, European countries, that "what's mine is mine even if you have the power to take it from me, that doesn't make it yours." As for Boulder, conservatives don't cluster in cities, which is why you don't find them there. Conservatives prefer to live in the suburbs and rural areas. And sorry to burst your bubble, but the more money people make, the more likely they are to be conservative, not liberal. 63% of those making over $200K a year identify as Republican. On the other hand, 63% of those making under $15K identify as Democrat. https://www.debt.org/faqs/americans-in-debt/economic-demographics-republicans/ Interestingly, too, among straight, white, evangelical homeowners, only 3% are hard-core liberal. 40% are hard-core conservative. And as we all know, homeowner wealth exceeds renter wealth by 36x. http://www.pleeps.org/2017/03/22/the-demographics-of-liberals-and-conservatives-with-cces-data/ Well, here you go. Here's a study on your claim. Conservative cities make more than liberal cities, have lower unemployment, lower cost of living, have a higher rate of marriage, more upward mobility, grow faster, and are better places to live. The only areas where liberal cities won were on number of bachelors degrees and women in tech. https://smartasset.com/mortgage/lib...-political-leaning-relates-to-economic-trends
@ your inability to refute his post? I agree. He posted facts backed with links, you posted a post that was torn apart. But go ahead, prove him wrong, I'll wait and ....wait. Giggle snort, indeed.
Now who is delusional. I'm glad to see that you have accepted liberal ideas, but that is what conservatives do, eventually they do accept liberal ideas. Liberalism is an outgrowth of the Enlightenment. John Locke was an Enlightenment philosopher. According to Funk and Wagnalls; CONSERVATISM, a general state of mind that is adverse to rapid change and innovation and strives for balance and order, while avoiding extremes. Originally conservatism arose as a reaction against the Age of Enlightenment. Conservatives advocate belief in faith over reason, tradition over free inquiry, hierarchy over equality, collective values over individualism, and divine or natural law over secular law. This description seems to describe just about every conservative that posts on this forum. It is almost funny at times, listening to conservatives going on about individualism, and then argue for tradition and the party line. It is the liberal, the freethinker who is truly individualistic, able to think apart from the heard mentality. This can be seen in that throughout the history of the US, it has been liberals who have been doing all the innovation. Of the founders, Jefferson and Franklin were the liberals, as opposed to the conservatives John Adams and Alexander Hamilton. Franklin did much to increase knowledge of electricity. He is the one who named the polarities, - / +. Jefferson invented the moldboard. Thomas Edison was a freethinker, as was Henry Ford. Albert Einstein was quite liberal, as was Schrodinger. The computer was developed, from mechanical calculators, to the invention of transistors, to laptops and cell phones, overwhelmingly by liberal leaning individuals. Steve Jobs was liberal as is Bill Gates and the folks over at Google. It is not just the people at the top, but everyone else. If one looks into the demographics of the centers of innovation, places like Redmond Washington and Cupertino California, one finds that the politics are liberal up and down the economic spectrum. The liberal control of the high tech industry is one if those things that makes working in places like Boulder, so much more enjoyable than other places. Liberal ownership of companies often results in better working conditions and benefits. A characteristic of the high tech world, is that new ideas begin in startups which are then bought up by large corporations. If conservatives ran those companies, the principles would just pocket the money and lay everyone off. But liberals run them, and the profits from the sales, are often shared with the workers. You should know that the left is really two groups, liberals and progressives. They are not the same. The folks at AT&T invented the transistor to be used in switching circuits. This is from where electronic computers began. But there was a couple of guys from Japan who got the bright idea to use the transistor for audio circuits. Their first product was the transistor radio. This was the beginning of Sony and the consumer electronics industry. Of course this happened after the United States had conquered Japan and liberalised it.
By the way, I didn't live in town, I lived in the mountains just west of Boulder. Boulder really is unique. The rural parts of Boulder county are more liberal than the city, and the city of Boulder is the most liberal city in the country.
Henry Ford was anything but a liberal. https://www.conservapedia.com/Henry_Ford Ford left most of his vast wealth to the Ford Foundation, which was taken over by his liberal son and has been devoted to leftist causes ever since, even though Henry Ford would have strongly opposed that. He was also "poorly educated" lol
I live in rural Larimer County, just a mile or so north of Boulder County. I am in the transition zone weld to the east and boulder to the south.
Did I not say that Ford was a freethinker? Freethinkers are the opposite of conservatives. It is almost exclusively liberals who introduce new ideas and products. Initially they are ridiculed and rejected. After awhile, once the new thing is proven, progressives will begin to adapt it. Once it becomes popular with progressives, the wishy washy people will accept it. Once the balance has been tipped, conservatives will begin to accept it. Give it enough time and conservatives will claim it was a conservative idea all along. Capitalism is like that. Adam Smith was a liberal, some would say a radical. The conservatives of the day preferred the tried and true mercantile system, just as they preferred Kings over elected leaders. But now days, conservatives claim capitalism as their own, pretending liberals are elsewhere. Conservatives claim Jefferson, even though he was clearly a liberal, they even claim Einstein, which is really kind of funny. Computers became a thing, in the popular imagination, in the 60's and by the mid 70's the personal computer revolution was well on its way. Yet conservatives, especially conservative Christians rejected them, calling them the work of the devil, the bringers of the dreaded mark of the beast. By the 90's conservatives began to accept computers. Today, some even claim that computers were a conservative idea, all along. But Ford, a conservative, get real. Ford educated himself. I sometimes brag about having gone through college with straight A's, even majoring in physics. But the fact of the matter is I mostly educated myself and tested through a lot of classes. I got a lot of inspiration from reading the biographies of people like Ford and Edison. I even tried a few of the experiments that Ford had done, as a child. However, I did the teapot thing outside.
For such a "highly educated" fella, you sure are high on opinions and short on facts. A liberal invented the internet, Al Gore, dontchya know?
AT&T invented the internet, before the breakup. The internet runs on phone lines. It is interlaced with voice. It wasn't AT&T alone, as several research universities were involved. Mostly out of California, I think. The DOD also threw in some support. After all, the original idea was to be able to communicate, even in time of war. The phone grid was a perfect fit.
Thanks, but I was mocking the Liberal, Al Gore. When you make claims like this: "It is almost exclusively liberals who introduce new ideas and products." I find any of your claims, hard to take seriously. I dont have the time or inclination to check all your claims, especially since you cant be bothered to post a link, to back them. Your opinions dont equal facts.
That's not what conservatism is today in the US and you know it. Conservatism in the US is characterized today by individualism, patriotism, the rule of law, capitalism, freedom. Liberalism in the US is characterized by communalism, globalism, "social justice", socialism, and repression. Both conservatives and liberals in the US can be "conservative" in the sense of not wanting things to change, as when liberals freak out every time conservatives move to reduce taxes and regulations, or "liberal" in the sense of wanting to change things, as when conservatives want to privatize government-run operations. The political positions are not descriptive of the reactive positions. If you want to understand the relation of the conservative to the individual, you have to understand that what the liberal does is he atomizes the individual so that nothing is left but the individual and the state. No one and nothing else matters. For conservatives, there are a whole host of other relations that come between the individual and the state. First, there's the family, the spouse, then the children, then the parents, then the extended family. All of these count for the conservative. Then there's the community, then the city, then the county, then the state. All of these count for the conservative. Then there's the church, God, religion, tradition. Then there's the business, either as employee or employer. For the liberal, none of these things matter. For the most extreme liberals, all of these things get in the way. They interfere with the liberals' attempts to reform society along whatever lines they deem fit. Not for nothing did Plato and Marx consider the family a hindrance to their perfect societies. John Locke was an Enlightenment thinker, but he was no liberal, except in the 18th century sense of being for freedom. Locke is the originator of modern day conservative thought along with Adam Smith. You're right in that modern day liberalism is the product of the Enlightenment, not from Locke, but from Hume, Voltaire, and Rousseau. Locke believed in religious toleration, but he firmly believed in God and excluded atheism from the religions he would tolerate. Locke believed in religion, morality, and truth while Hume denied any objective moral truth. He is your intellectual forebear. You're taking a very small subset of liberals and offering them as the standard, but that's not how it works. It would be like me offering William F. Buckley as an example of what conservatives are like (educated, erudite, sesquipedalian, funny) and ignoring the great mass of conservatives, who are more like Rush Limbaugh, who didn't know the difference between a duck and a goose. The great mass of liberals are Luddites (union members), repressive (bureaucrats and SJWs), unimaginative, uncreative, and uneducated. (48% of those without a college degree voted Democrat, and those without a college degree number 65% of the population, for a total of 31%. 51% of those with a college degree voted Democrat, but they only number 35% of the population, for a total of just 18%. So uneducated Dems outnumber educated Dems by about 7 to 4.) Looking at innovators, I'm sure I could find plenty who were conservative in their politics. It was already pointed out to you that Henry Ford was no liberal, but an anti-Semitic Republican. Alexander Graham Bell supported eugenics. The Wright brothers belonged to the Brethren church, a pretty conservative denomination. Your view of corporate leaders is just silly. Of Fortune 500 CEO's, 50% identify as Republican, 2% as Democrat. The idea that conservative business leaders would just sell off the company is obviously nonsense. https://brandongaille.com/47-bizarre-fortune-500-ceo-demographics/ Here's a list of 25 prominent tech leaders who are Republican or conservative: https://www.newsmax.com/BestLists/republicans-tech-list-influential/2017/06/28/id/798682/ You might want to ask James Damore if working for a liberal high tech company was such a joy for him. Finally, there's this study, which showed that Republican run states do better than Democratic ones. Of the ten best run states, nine were Republican and one was split (Florida); of the ten worst run states, nine were Democrat and one was Republican. Liberals sure are innovative, in that they find new ways to **** things up on a regular basis. Best-Run States Are Heavily Republican, Study Finds https://www.investors.com/politics/commentary/best-run-states-are-heavily-republican-study-finds/
Fact check, it was science labs in the US, Britain, and France who developed computer communications standards, the US government funded research into connecting the lines (ARPANET), and Tim Berners-Lee working at CERN in Switzerland who invented the Worldwide Web. AT&T had nothing to do with it.
