| |
| Evidence now proves that run away government spending is a direct result of women given the vote.
Posted: 5/30/2008 7:29:04 AM |
How about we compare the economies and quality of life between countries that don't allow women to vote vs those that do?
I'd like to know the answer to that question...how do we compare?
Many women died in the streets during the Suffrage era, many more than that spent their lives in prison just so I could vote.
Not just women died to give women and everyone else that freedom to vote. Men have died for that cause too.
Keep this thread going and we could look at it as a study on the emotional response of women when viewing this information. | |
|
| Evidence now proves that run away government spending is a direct result of women given the vote.
Posted: 5/30/2008 8:00:32 AM |
I'd like to know the answer to that question...how do we compare?
Such wonderful countries to live in as Saudi Arabia, and the UAE, Brunei. Wonderful places to live I hear. The USA seems to be sharing more and more values with them every year.
Keep this thread going and we could look at it as a study on the emotional response of women when viewing this disinformation.
fixed your typo. | |
|
| |
| |
| |
| |
| Evidence now proves that run away government spending is a direct result of women given the vote.
Posted: 6/7/2008 9:05:05 AM | warriorDawg, there is nothing wrong with private corporations getting a government "paycheck". A lot of government functions are privatized and government at every level awards contracts to private vendors, as it should be.
The problem is the politicization of it, sole source contracting like Halliburton, non-compliance, no accountability, the influence of lobbyists, etc. , all of which game and abuse as essentially good system. | |
|
| Evidence now proves that run away government spending is a direct result of women given the vote.
Posted: 6/7/2008 9:15:25 AM | I've seen you on POF before and previously thought you were a more open minded person. Evidently not. Even entertaining such snobbish, myopic writing is a window
into a person... namely you. These are papers written by detached gentry that have absolutely no clue about what's really going on. I agree with other members, the problems we have today are directly based on Corporate over-spending and our government's bribed bias to that end. I find it insulting that you even brought this matter up to the forum. You apparently like getting a rise out of people for attention.
Furthermore, one might say (given your reading material) the the source of our
civilizations problems are rooted at cavemen who invented 'the wheel'. LOL | |
|
| Evidence now proves that run away trolls cause cancer and sometimes smell funny.
Posted: 6/7/2008 10:45:40 AM | Im sorry, I have to agree with Shieldvulf...
I also went to the link to read these prestigious papers and was directed to a paper writen my J.Lott and L. Kenny "Did Women's Suffage Change the Size and Scope of Government?"(1999), but I didnt want to pay 10 bucks to read it.
So, I was hoping the OP would synopsize the paper, since I cant afford 10 bucks at the moment and dont listen to Rush anymore. I believe this subject deserves more critical thinking than "Women Love Shoes".
BTW...Here's another quote from that scholar, Loki
I'm feeling a shade restless today. It seems I have pent up naughtiness that is trying to fight it's way out. So much so that I have contemplated streaking Matthew's school play on the life of Martin Luther King Jr. that is to be held Thursday. Loki Laufeyjarson
I can also give you a link to his prestgious MySpace page... | |
|
| Evidence now proves that run away government spending is a direct result of women given the vote.
Posted: 6/7/2008 7:29:57 PM |
I've seen you on POF before and previously thought you were a more open minded person.
eastendwoman, if this was written by a tabloid or even the NY Post I would have passed it by. Fact is the writers are John R Lott from Yale University and Lawrence R. Kenny, U of Florida, and they are currently at The University of Chicago. These universities are not diploma mills and give a pretty solid education. These are not men in wife-beater T-shirts drinking beer at that local pub ranting.
Both reports are in PDF format and I purposefully did not take excerpts for fear that people would say that I was bias in my selections. I actually have not really taken much of a position because of the political correct nature of the subject matter. The PDF reader is free so I am not sure why the one reader was not able to see both reports for free or why he talked about having to spend $10 to see it.
I am very open-minded and for that reason I do not blow off casually any topic. I will go into “politically incorrect” territory but I try my best to be respectful and have my ducks in a row before speaking. Originally I was all for the American idea of a colorless and genderless society where everyone is treated fairly without regard to these things. That concept has changed from the original concept to the one today where people are totally obsessed with the concept of who votes how and why. Take the Clinton/Obama primaries and it’s always discussed as to who on average Blacks are voting for and who women are voting for and who Hispanics vote for and so on. So, for quite a long time, there has been a data base building that one can look at to determine how people of different types vote. The data that these authors are using is solid and the techniques that they are using to analyze the data are first class.
Basically, the authors have identified that women as a whole are much more likely to vote for large government programs, more likely to approve programs that redistribute wealth from the taxpayers to the poor and are basically much more generous with the US Treasury than men. If one excludes the female vote, totally different candidates would win the primaries of both political parties and totally different people would be our senators, sit in the house as congressman, and even Presidents would all have been different with a few exceptions. The candidates that women support are much more likely to be big spenders than those chosen by men. Next time you hear voting analysis on TV, I’m sure you will hear the breakdown of how people are voting. The authors used to same data that the news people use.
Some women are very fiscally frugal but statistically most are big time spenders and they vote that way according to the polling data. I suppose that one could attack the reasons the authors provide as rational but the data few could dispute other than on purely emotional grounds. If I told you that the vast majority of Blacks voted for Democrats based on the polling data, would you believe that? The data used by the authors came from the same exact place.
This most definitely is a sensitive issue in the reactions I am receiving and I did foresee that and said please do not kill the messenger. I did not write this paper, I just read it and submitted it out of curiosity as to what others think of it. So far, it has only really been answered emotionally or by personal attacks on me and I was hoping for more to be honest. So, my disappointment in your reply, eastendwoman, is even more than your disappointment in my posting this. I submit that I am far more open-minded than you in that I address the actual issues and try my best to avoid personal attacks. | |
|
| Evidence now proves that run away government spending is a direct result of women given the vote.
Posted: 6/8/2008 5:27:09 AM | | Runaway government spending is everybody's fault,from the welfare bum to the corporate CEO,to the congressman or senator or local leader who buys votes with tax payer dollars to the voters who sell their votes.I find some people's suggestion that the Op speaking his mind means that he won't get any dates ridiculous...i don't know about him but i gave up kissing one side of a woman to get what's on the other side a long time ago... a real man speaks his mind and if a woman doesn't like it so what. | |
|
Home
login 
