Mississippi

[ElectionsGuy]

The question becomes how do we measure intelligence?

IQ? Otherwise I don't know.

[opebo]

However, the average MS voter's opinions on the size of government, tax policy, regulations, and energy would do far more good for the economy

So, 'the economy' means the rich, cheesepizza?  Perhaps you are 'smart', not many people understand that.

[ElectionsGuy]

However, the average MS voter's opinions on the size of government, tax policy, regulations, and energy would do far more good for the economy

So, 'the economy' means the rich, cheesepizza?  Perhaps you are 'smart', not many people understand that.

A lot of poor ordinary Mississippians vote republican simply because they prefer a smaller government and less taxes. The republican party isn't owned by rich businessmen like a lot of people assume.

[opebo]

However, the average MS voter's opinions on the size of government, tax policy, regulations, and energy would do far more good for the economy

So, 'the economy' means the rich, cheesepizza?  Perhaps you are 'smart', not many people understand that.

A lot of poor ordinary Mississippians vote republican simply because they prefer a smaller government and less taxes. The republican party isn't owned by rich businessmen like a lot of people assume.

That's right, they vote to benefit the rich, guy.

[barfbag]

However, the average MS voter's opinions on the size of government, tax policy, regulations, and energy would do far more good for the economy

So, 'the economy' means the rich, cheesepizza?  Perhaps you are 'smart', not many people understand that.

You can get rich by starting your own successful business too. You don't always have to vote for the candidate who promises to hand you more money from someone who already has more than you.
A lot of poor ordinary Mississippians vote republican simply because they prefer a smaller government and less taxes. The republican party isn't owned by rich businessmen like a lot of people assume.

That's right, they vote to benefit the rich, guy.

[cheesepizza]

However, the average MS voter's opinions on the size of government, tax policy, regulations, and energy would do far more good for the economy

So, 'the economy' means the rich, cheesepizza?  Perhaps you are 'smart', not many people understand that.

You can get rich by starting your own successful business too. You don't always have to vote for the candidate who promises to hand you more money from someone who already has more than you.
A lot of poor ordinary Mississippians vote republican simply because they prefer a smaller government and less taxes. The republican party isn't owned by rich businessmen like a lot of people assume.

That's right, they vote to benefit the rich, guy.

But benefiting the rich also benefits the poor.  No one's ever been hired by a poor person.  Cutting taxes on the rich will only reap benefits for the poor.  Raising taxes on the rich will result in layoffs, which hurt the poor.

[barfbag]

However, the average MS voter's opinions on the size of government, tax policy, regulations, and energy would do far more good for the economy

So, 'the economy' means the rich, cheesepizza?  Perhaps you are 'smart', not many people understand that.

A lot of poor ordinary Mississippians vote republican simply because they prefer a smaller government and less taxes. The republican party isn't owned by rich businessmen like a lot of people assume.

That's right, they vote to benefit the rich, guy.

No they don't vote to benefit the rich guy. They vote to limit government from interfering with their financial privacy. Just because they aren't wealthy doesn't mean they want the government taking someone else's money and giving it to them. Believe it or not there are still economic ethics where people believe in hard work and sacrifice over government redistribution of the wealth.

[ElectionsGuy]

However, the average MS voter's opinions on the size of government, tax policy, regulations, and energy would do far more good for the economy

So, 'the economy' means the rich, cheesepizza?  Perhaps you are 'smart', not many people understand that.

A lot of poor ordinary Mississippians vote republican simply because they prefer a smaller government and less taxes. The republican party isn't owned by rich businessmen like a lot of people assume.

That's right, they vote to benefit the rich, guy.

The republican party believes in equal treatment for the poor, middle class, and rich. That's why they favor a flat tax. They do not vote for the rich.

[eric82oslo]

However, the average MS voter's opinions on the size of government, tax policy, regulations, and energy would do far more good for the economy

So, 'the economy' means the rich, cheesepizza?  Perhaps you are 'smart', not many people understand that.

You can get rich by starting your own successful business too. You don't always have to vote for the candidate who promises to hand you more money from someone who already has more than you.
A lot of poor ordinary Mississippians vote republican simply because they prefer a smaller government and less taxes. The republican party isn't owned by rich businessmen like a lot of people assume.

That's right, they vote to benefit the rich, guy.

But benefiting the rich also benefits the poor.  No one's ever been hired by a poor person.  Cutting taxes on the rich will only reap benefits for the poor.  Raising taxes on the rich will result in layoffs, which hurt the poor.

This is the old GOP argument that is all about rhetoric, but nothing about reality. Scientific studies show the exact opposite fact to be true. The nations in the world with the least amount of poor people, namely Scandinavian/Nordic countries and Japan, are also the nations with the highest taxes on rich people. Sweden for instance has an average tax per citizen of almost 60% (I think it was 58% last time I check), and then again much, much higher taxes on the absurdly rich.

[barfbag]

However, the average MS voter's opinions on the size of government, tax policy, regulations, and energy would do far more good for the economy

So, 'the economy' means the rich, cheesepizza?  Perhaps you are 'smart', not many people understand that.

You can get rich by starting your own successful business too. You don't always have to vote for the candidate who promises to hand you more money from someone who already has more than you.
A lot of poor ordinary Mississippians vote republican simply because they prefer a smaller government and less taxes. The republican party isn't owned by rich businessmen like a lot of people assume.

That's right, they vote to benefit the rich, guy.

But benefiting the rich also benefits the poor.  No one's ever been hired by a poor person.  Cutting taxes on the rich will only reap benefits for the poor.  Raising taxes on the rich will result in layoffs, which hurt the poor.

This is the old GOP argument that is all about rhetoric, but nothing about reality. Scientific studies show the exact opposite fact to be true. The nations in the world with the least amount of poor people, namely Scandinavian/Nordic countries and Japan, are also the nations with the highest taxes on rich people. Sweden for instance has an average tax per citizen of almost 60% (I think it was 58% last time I check), and then again much, much higher taxes on the absurdly rich.

And they also rank poorly when it comes to having wealthy people and successful businesses. Their militaries are also inefficient compared to the U.S.

[everybodyvote]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'd rather live in a society with 90% middle class, 5%, rich, and 5% poor, than a society with 60% middle class, 20% rich, and 20% poor.

Since the military is immoral (like NAMBLA), I'm glad when they're "inefficient."

[barfbag]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'd rather live in a society with 90% middle class, 5%, rich, and 5% poor, than a society with 60% middle class, 20% rich, and 20% poor.

Since the military is immoral (like NAMBLA), I'm glad when they're "inefficient."

Having a military is immoral? I don't know of a country who doesn't have a military. I think you know better than to compare them to the disgusting organization you just did. However, plenty of Democrats are here to stand up for NAMBLA I'm sure.

[Person Man]

However, the average MS voter's opinions on the size of government, tax policy, regulations, and energy would do far more good for the economy

So, 'the economy' means the rich, cheesepizza?  Perhaps you are 'smart', not many people understand that.

A lot of poor ordinary Mississippians vote republican simply because they prefer a smaller government and less taxes. The republican party isn't owned by rich businessmen like a lot of people assume.

That's right, they vote to benefit the rich, guy.

No they don't vote to benefit the rich guy. They vote to limit government from interfering with their financial privacy. Just because they aren't wealthy doesn't mean they want the government taking someone else's money and giving it to them. Believe it or not there are still economic ethics where people believe in hard work and sacrifice over government redistribution of the wealth.

Because people have the right to be poor.

[eric82oslo]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'd rather live in a society with 90% middle class, 5%, rich, and 5% poor, than a society with 60% middle class, 20% rich, and 20% poor.

Since the military is immoral (like NAMBLA), I'm glad when they're "inefficient."

Having a military is immoral? I don't know of a country who doesn't have a military.

Costa Rica is the only country in the world to have constitutionally banned a national military. They did that shortly after the Second World War had finished, in 1949. From Wikipedia: "On December 1, 1948, President José Figueres Ferrer of Costa Rica abolished the military of Costa Rica after victory in the civil war in that year. In 1949, the abolition of the military was introduced in Article 12 of the Costa Rican Constitution. The budget previously dedicated to the military now is dedicated to security, education and culture; the country maintains Police Guard forces. The museum Museo Nacional de Costa Rica was placed in the Cuartel Bellavista as a symbol of commitment to culture. In 1986, President Oscar Arias Sánchez declared December 1 as the Día de la Abolición del Ejército (Military abolition day) with Law #8115. Unlike its neighbours, Costa Rica has not endured a civil war since 1948. Costa Rica maintains small forces capable of law enforcement and foreign peacekeeping, but has no permanent standing army."

Also Iceland has no army. However, they have made an agreement with the US government that the US army will protect them against enemies and potential foreign attacks.

[cheesepizza]

However, the average MS voter's opinions on the size of government, tax policy, regulations, and energy would do far more good for the economy

So, 'the economy' means the rich, cheesepizza?  Perhaps you are 'smart', not many people understand that.

You can get rich by starting your own successful business too. You don't always have to vote for the candidate who promises to hand you more money from someone who already has more than you.
A lot of poor ordinary Mississippians vote republican simply because they prefer a smaller government and less taxes. The republican party isn't owned by rich businessmen like a lot of people assume.

That's right, they vote to benefit the rich, guy.

But benefiting the rich also benefits the poor.  No one's ever been hired by a poor person.  Cutting taxes on the rich will only reap benefits for the poor.  Raising taxes on the rich will result in layoffs, which hurt the poor.

This is the old GOP argument that is all about rhetoric, but nothing about reality. Scientific studies show the exact opposite fact to be true. The nations in the world with the least amount of poor people, namely Scandinavian/Nordic countries and Japan, are also the nations with the highest taxes on rich people. Sweden for instance has an average tax per citizen of almost 60% (I think it was 58% last time I check), and then again much, much higher taxes on the absurdly rich.

Under your premise, a country would do better with higher taxes and more social welfare spending.  This is basically saying less economic freedom is good.  One problem with that:  all in all, countries with more economic freedom(as measured by Heritage's Index) are far better off.  I'd much rather live in the top 10 countries for economic freedom than the bottom ten.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gpLfQvRmf2E&feature=youtu.be

See this informative video for more information.

[Gass3268]

However, the average MS voter's opinions on the size of government, tax policy, regulations, and energy would do far more good for the economy

So, 'the economy' means the rich, cheesepizza?  Perhaps you are 'smart', not many people understand that.

You can get rich by starting your own successful business too. You don't always have to vote for the candidate who promises to hand you more money from someone who already has more than you.
A lot of poor ordinary Mississippians vote republican simply because they prefer a smaller government and less taxes. The republican party isn't owned by rich businessmen like a lot of people assume.

That's right, they vote to benefit the rich, guy.

But benefiting the rich also benefits the poor.  No one's ever been hired by a poor person.  Cutting taxes on the rich will only reap benefits for the poor.  Raising taxes on the rich will result in layoffs, which hurt the poor.

This is the old GOP argument that is all about rhetoric, but nothing about reality. Scientific studies show the exact opposite fact to be true. The nations in the world with the least amount of poor people, namely Scandinavian/Nordic countries and Japan, are also the nations with the highest taxes on rich people. Sweden for instance has an average tax per citizen of almost 60% (I think it was 58% last time I check), and then again much, much higher taxes on the absurdly rich.

And they also rank poorly when it comes to having wealthy people and successful businesses. Their militaries are also inefficient compared to the U.S.

Wait, when did Japan stop having successful businesses?

[barfbag]

However, the average MS voter's opinions on the size of government, tax policy, regulations, and energy would do far more good for the economy

So, 'the economy' means the rich, cheesepizza?  Perhaps you are 'smart', not many people understand that.

You can get rich by starting your own successful business too. You don't always have to vote for the candidate who promises to hand you more money from someone who already has more than you.
A lot of poor ordinary Mississippians vote republican simply because they prefer a smaller government and less taxes. The republican party isn't owned by rich businessmen like a lot of people assume.

That's right, they vote to benefit the rich, guy.

But benefiting the rich also benefits the poor.  No one's ever been hired by a poor person.  Cutting taxes on the rich will only reap benefits for the poor.  Raising taxes on the rich will result in layoffs, which hurt the poor.

This is the old GOP argument that is all about rhetoric, but nothing about reality. Scientific studies show the exact opposite fact to be true. The nations in the world with the least amount of poor people, namely Scandinavian/Nordic countries and Japan, are also the nations with the highest taxes on rich people. Sweden for instance has an average tax per citizen of almost 60% (I think it was 58% last time I check), and then again much, much higher taxes on the absurdly rich.

And they also rank poorly when it comes to having wealthy people and successful businesses. Their militaries are also inefficient compared to the U.S.

Wait, when did Japan stop having successful businesses?

My point was they rank low in economic freedom which comes before having economic success.