Perfect example of what happens when liberals are in charge...

[IndySteel]

California chaos -- Unchallenged liberalism leaves homelessness, drug abuse, garbage in its wake



http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2018/03/07/tammy-bruce-california-chaos-unchallenged-liberalism-leaves-homelessness-drug-abuse-garbage-in-its-wake.html

 

[SteelerInLebanon]

But faux news......

 

[Steeltime]

"That's not excrement on the streets - those are (D) voters. And those aren't hypodermic needles out in plain view - they are 'attitude fine-tuning aids.' "

/s Ministry of Information

 

[Smash]

If you give a listen to Michael Savage, he's been going on about this for weeks. He's a San Fran resident. He likens the leftist political machine in Cali to Tammany Hall of New York in the early 1900's.

https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/Diseased-Streets-472430013.html

 

[Elfiero]

California chaos -- Unchallenged liberalism leaves homelessness, drug abuse, garbage in its wake



http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2018/03/07/tammy-bruce-california-chaos-unchallenged-liberalism-leaves-homelessness-drug-abuse-garbage-in-its-wake.html

Tell us more!

 

[IndySteel]

Tell us more!

Keep up on current events, ****. Oterrorist decimated the red states. Trump is reviving them.

 

[Stewey]

Tell us more!

Yet these people would rather be poor than be liberal.

Stay on topic. This has nothing to do with the OP.

 

[Steeltime]

Tell us more!

You copy-and-paste lying lies from lying liars and never check the accuracy of what you post, correct???

Our bigger question concerns whether it’s significant that a lot of poor counties are located in red states. There’s reason for at least a bit of skepticism.

For starters, the list is dominated by rural areas. Generally speaking, rural areas have a lower cost of living, so the small income you make in a poor, rural Texas county is going to go further than it would if you lived in a poor, urban area like Detroit or Camden, N.J. This raises questions about how comparatively disadvantaged poor Americans are in rural and urban areas.

Also, rural areas are areas where Republicans tend to do well electorally. By contrast, impoverished areas of big cities are big enough population-wise to be balanced by more affluent neighborhoods, and these poor urban areas are often (though not always) in blue states.

It’s also worth pointing out that many of the counties on the list are located in Appalachia, particularly in such states as Kentucky, West Virginia, Mississippi and Georgia. That’s a region that has suffered economically for generations -- long predating the time when Republicans took over from Democrats in most elected offices.

In Appalachia, "it’s clear there’s a regional problem, born of isolation, geographic and political; exploitation, of timber and coal; and poor education," said Al Cross, director of the Institute for Rural Journalism and Community Issues at the University of Kentucky.

Finally, there’s an eccentricity that shaped both of the top-100 lists. Each is dominated by three states: Texas, Georgia and Kentucky. What ties together these three states? They have a lot of counties. In fact, these three states rank first, second and third on the list of states that have the most counties. Texas has 254, Georgia 159 and Kentucky 120.

This means that these three states have lots of rural, small-population counties, so they take up a disproportionate share of the spots on these lists. On each list, these three states collectively account for more than 40 percent of the counties listed.

Importantly, each of these three states are red states. If some of the bigger blue states had been sliced into as many counties as Texas, Georgia and Kentucky were, some of those blue-state counties might have been poor and rural, and that could have changed the complexion of the list. As it is, blue states tend to have smaller numbers of counties. New York has 62, California has 57, Washington state has 39, Oregon has 36, New Jersey has 21 and Massachusetts has just 14.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...e-97-nations-100-poorest-counties-red-states/

What do the top ten cities with the highest poverty rate all have in common? DEMOCRAT LEADERSHIP!

Detroit, MI (1st on the poverty rate list) hasn’t elected
a Republican mayor since 1961;
Buffalo, NY (2nd) hasn’t elected one since 1954;
Cincinnati, OH (3rd)… since 1984;
Cleveland, OH (4th)… since 1989;
Miami, FL (5th) has never had a Republican Mayor;
St. Louis, MO (6th)…. since 1949;
El Paso, TX (7th) has never had a Republican Mayor;
Milwaukee, WI (8th)… since 1908;
Philadelphia, PA (9th)… since 1952;
Newark, NJ (10th)… since 1907.

The Left, of course, laughs at the news that the ten poorest cities in the country are all run by Democrats. Meanwhile, they parrot the talking points of the liberal media by pretending that stories like this one, about the poorest states being Republican, actually mean something. The brilliant Mark Hendrickson expounded on both of these stories (you can read both of his pieces here and here) for Forbes magazine online, and his conclusion is this: “The most fundamental difference between the data that conservatives prefer—that the 10 poorest cities are longtime Democratic strongholds—and the data that liberals will be more inclined to cite—that the 10 poorest states are predominantly Republican, is that conservatives can point to actual policies that Democrats implemented that contributed to the impoverishment of the cities, while the liberals cannot point to specific GOP policies that have caused the poorer states to lag behind.”

While the most basic information may come to us by way of chain mail forwards, just a little digging shows that the truth is really as simple as it seems. See, the truth of the matter is this: Democrat policies are destroying our nation’s cities. If the voters in these cities are happy being poor and having little to no prospect of leaving poverty, then they are electing the right people. If they’d like the opportunity to climb out of poverty and build a middle-to-upper class legacy for their family, then they could start by electing people in whose interest it is to see them prosper — conservatives.

Democrats win when the people are poor, conservatives win when the people prosper. That is the difference.

https://eaglerising.com/1912/democrats-run-americas-ten-poorest-cities/

Debating elftardPoloLiar - Jee-zus Christ, it's not like taking candy from a baby. It's like clubbing a disabled baby seal with a backhoe.

 

[Ron Burgundy]

Finally, there’s an eccentricity that shaped both of the top-100 lists. Each is dominated by three states: Texas, Georgia and Kentucky. What ties together these three states? They have a lot of counties. In fact, these three states rank first, second and third on the list of states that have the most counties. Texas has 254, Georgia 159 and Kentucky 120.

This means that these three states have lots of rural, small-population counties, so they take up a disproportionate share of the spots on these lists. On each list, these three states collectively account for more than 40 percent of the counties listed.

Importantly, each of these three states are red states. If some of the bigger blue states had been sliced into as many counties as Texas, Georgia and Kentucky were, some of those blue-state counties might have been poor and rural, and that could have changed the complexion of the list. As it is, blue states tend to have smaller numbers of counties. New York has 62, California has 57, Washington state has 39, Oregon has 36, New Jersey has 21 and Massachusetts has just 14.

Good point. For example, PA has 67 counties. Physically much larger areas. A lot of what we call "townships" here would be counties in other states.
Even in red states, the blue parts are almost always the urban areas which is where the bulk of poor people, murders, and crime are.

 

[Steelr4evr]

California is providing the blueprint of what not to do. Thanks Cali.

I'm going back to Cali Cali Cali..i'm going back to cali...I don't think so.

 

[SteelChip]

California is providing the blueprint of what not to do. .

But they have the smartest leaders...

...leading the most sophisticated constituents in the Country.

They even concocted their own post "Separatist" flag

 

[ZonaBurgh]

Grosse Point, MI......across the street, literally, is Detroit.

The difference is shocking, mansions to a war zone.

 

[Ron Burgundy]

Gotta love it when Libs are suddenly all about states' rights.

 

[Steelerfan]

But they have the smartest leaders...

 

[SteelChip]

Bwahahahahaha

Cost for California bullet train system rises to $77.3 billion
http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-bullet-train-cost-increase-20180309-story.html

The price of the California bullet train project jumped sharply Friday when the state rail authority announced that the cost of connecting Los Angeles to San Francisco would be $77.3 billion and could rise as high as $98.1 billion — an uptick of at least $13 billion from estimates two years ago.

The rail authority also said the earliest trains could operate on a partial system between San Francisco and Bakersfield would be 2029 — four years later than the previous projection. The full system would not begin operating until 2033.

Thank you again Rick Scott. We coulda been in the same boat down here if he'da gone along with Obama's master plan. Pretty soon Mexifornia will be as broke as the federal govt..

Ooops.........I didn't see Ark's post. Mods may wanna move or just delete. Almost exact info....LOL

 

[CharlesDavenport]

NYC, Phila, Balt, Detroit, ...

 

[tapeANaspirin2it]

Venezuela loves socialism

 

[Spike]

Cost for California bullet train system rises to $77.3 billion

The full system would not begin operating until 2033.

Won't be finished till 2033???

San Fran will be under water by then, why even keep it going?

 

[SteelChip]

Won't be finished till 2033???

San Fran will be under water by then, why even keep it going?

Or under a different flag, one or the other.

 

[Spike]

Passenger train choo choos just don't make economic sense, that's why FL passed on that boondoggle///massive taxpayer subsidies required to even get it going, let alone keep it running

WE aren't Europe, Japan or China with huge population centers that need close connections, we are suburbia and people need their cars

 

[Ron Burgundy]

Passenger train choo choos just don't make economic sense, that's why FL passed on that boondoggle///massive taxpayer subsidies required to even get it going, let alone keep it running

WE aren't Europe, Japan or China with huge population centers that need close connections, we are suburbia and people need their cars

Europe has large population centers with not much in between so mass transit is effective.
What the planners in America don't get is that frequency is more important than speed if you're going to get people to use mass transit. If trains (or buses) aren't frequent enough, i.e. Amtrak, people won't use them and it's not efficient. If you run too many trains (or buses) so that it's convenient to use, then there aren't enough people on each one and that isn't efficient either.
Right now I'm a driver for a private transportation company whose business is transporting railroad crews and believe me, their stuff doesn't run anywhere close to being on time. It's 2:23 am and I'm just getting home from work.

 

[SteelChip]

Right now I'm a driver for a private transportation company

I'll give you props JonBoy, there ain't no grass growin' under your ***.

 

[IndySteel]

I'll give you props JonBoy, there ain't no grass growin' under your ***.

But if he moves to Florida he’ll have swamp ***.

 

[Ron Burgundy]

I'll give you props JonBoy, there ain't no grass growin' under your ***.

Still have many thousands of dollars in debt left from my business that I had to sell at a loss thanks to Obamunism. Should have just closed it and walked away in 2010 instead of trying to keep it afloat so I could sell it.

 

[SteelChip]

But if he moves to Florida he’ll have swamp ***.

110 in the shade, no trace of a breeze and 90% humidity will do that to the best of them Indy.