Don't listen to the liberals - Right-wingers really are nicer people, latest research shows

We are more generous as well. Not at all like the stereotypic image which is often portrayed.

Well, I'm not really willing to say that one political affiliation makes a person more nice or more generous. But first, I'd like to point out that Yoss's study was done in England. I'd also like to point out that Democrats, on the whole, tend to be of lower income levels and therefore, have less to give.

On a side note, from my personal observations of who donates money for scholarships for memorials or scholarships, I've found that often the people who make the least, give the most. I've also found that most people who make less money don't keep as close track of their donations and don't always deduct such donations from their taxes.

I haven't really drawn too many final conclusions from these observations, but they are my observations, nonetheless.

People with the "mean people suck" bumper stickers are pretty much talking about themselves?

quote:

Originally posted by Amy:
Well, I'm not really willing to say that one political affiliation makes a person more nice or more generous. But first, I'd like to point out that Yoss's study was done in England. I'd also like to point out that Democrats, on the whole, tend to be of lower income levels and therefore, have less to give.

On a side note, from my personal observations of who donates money for scholarships for memorials or scholarships, I've found that often the people who make the least, give the most. I've also found that most people who make less money don't keep as close track of their donations and don't always deduct such donations from their taxes.

I haven't really drawn too many final conclusions from these observations, but they are my observations, nonetheless.

I have observed that the income taxes we paid last year were very, very high and so were the property taxes. I'm assuming you mean "give the most" as a percentage of income on that donor observation, Amy?

For the record, I am not nicer than Amy is, (who is!?!) but am still generally pretty nice!

Amy-I hope you know I was only kidding with my response. This kind of report is ridiculous and funny at best. I would like to say that Obama finally said something with merit. If he can get the black community to stand up and take care of their families, I would vote for him. It would be well worth the increase taxes if the "change" he is always talking about is this. He gave a great speech. We all know he can do that, let's hope many were listening. Success has many components but family, education and self esteem are at the top of the list. IMO

I would like to add self-respect to that list - that's a biggie IMO.

you really have to ignore studies like this. for instance: sean hannity. what a hate monger. would not call him a "nice" conservative. or rush limbaugh. or some individuals i know (and may even be related too) and gus, while i think we're on different sides of the aisle politcally, i more than agree with you about how local tax dollars are spent (and a good share of federal dollars as well.) but, as a fellow first generation american, i have to laud a country that has obama as candidate for president. other countries are much more class-bound...and the troubles england is now facing (mobs of unemployed youth, huge welfare rolls, a rigid educational system, with a good share of elitism) show that doesnt work either.

quote:

Originally posted by GEmom2:
I have observed that the income taxes we paid last year were very, very high and so were the property taxes. I'm assuming you mean "give the most" as a percentage of income on that donor observation, Amy?

Yes, that is what I meant - as a percentage of what they have to charities/organizations/individuals in need. And for the record, you're really very nice, GEmom2.


Gus,
You know I agree with you regarding how the money is being spent. I'm honestly "happy" (read that as freely giving/willing) to pay taxes if I know the money isn't being wasted on stupid "pet projects" or things that are simply a poor investment. Of course, what one considers a good project or a good investment is as individual as we all are, which, I think is a big part of what causes the party divide.

ST, Yes, those studies are sort of silly, aren't they? I mean, I can think of many people in both of our major political parties who are genuinely wonderful people as well as individuals from both sides that are complete a**holes. I like to contemplate people and their behaviors...I guess that's what I was doing in response to Yoss's post. Didn't really mean to give it more gravity than it deserved. My response was likely also because I spent the whole day without TV, computer, or lights and couldn't get any housework done without my electricity!

OH, I almost forgot Gus, do you read The Economist? My husband does and gives me the abridged/condensed run-down. He knows much more than that causes me to have convulsions. Anyway, there was a really intersting article about trade deficits....This admin has not done us any favors in that regard. We are in close to the worst shape compared with most of our like-minded allies. It's worth a read. I don't think France is a good model in terms of economy at all - far too much power with the unions. I'm not sure any government/country really has it quite "right" but hopefully, with intelligent, dedicated people who are willing to do what's right for all in spite of offers/tempatations for personal gain, we will someday get it right.

Oh, and we are already paying for the uninsured...why not have a national insurance program so that people will pay SOMETHING rather than the nothing many uninsured are paying right now?

Gus,
Can you tell me where I can read/view the report on pork barrel politics? I'd like to read it. What you are saying is also contrary to the sources I've been reading about who is wasting money in Washington....but, really, it's neither here nor there - both are to blame and I'd like to know what is getting spent where. We need to hold lawmaker's feet to the fire.

Yes, I think I have somewhat more faith in government than you do that they are able to run something well. There ARE departments that do. Of course, I still agree that there are many that don't but if we don't get national health insurance, our health care system will crash and there may not be enough life support systems out there to revive it without many, many unnecessary deaths. Sometime I can tell you all about what's happening from my husband's viewpoint within the system as well as my viewpoint in terms of kids not wanting to practice medicine....over a drink one of these days.

My pointing out the article on the trade deficit wasn't necessarily a suggestion that the trade deficit is the culprit of all our woes. But it's too far out of balance. Absolutely we won't be on the plus side of things as long as we rely so much on foreign oil but drilling in the protected lands of Alaska and off-shore, right now, would not be in the best interset of our country in the long run...we can talk about that too sometime.

quote:

Originally posted by Gus:
AS to the study, it was in the Trib or the Daily Herald. Saw some repubs on the list but more dems for sure. Go find it.

OH, well, if they were addressing Illinois politicians, for sure the Dems are far worse at corrupt behavior. It's really a shame because as you know, I do truly believe in the principles of the Democratic party....but corruption is not one of them.

I don't think gutting the military is an option either - I wouldn't go there. But I do think we could make much wiser decisions about how we use our military....

quote:

Originally posted by Gus:
German unemployment currently stands at 7.9%. In February of 2008 French unemployment was at 7.5%. Spains rate is about 10.4%.

I know you guys are having fun and just talking between friends. But there's some large issues in your discussion that deserve some light from a different source. For anyone who needs a rule of thumb, it should be this: don't believe the government's economic measurements. You may not be comparing apples to apples when you cite U.S. unemployment figures in relation to those from other countries. Same situation for any other economic measurements. Here is some discussion about how the US distorts its employment figures:

shadow stats dot com Employment and Unemployment Reporting

Up until the Clinton administration, a discouraged worker was one who was willing, able and ready to work but had given up looking because there were no jobs to be had. The Clinton administration dismissed to the non-reporting netherworld about five million discouraged workers who had been so categorized for more than a year. As of July 2004, the less-than-a-year discouraged workers total 504,000. Adding in the netherworld takes the unemployment rate up to about 12.5%.

Compare THAT figure to the ones you get from Europe. Yea, the figure's from 2004, but know that today's figures are similarly distorted.

And here is a synopsis from Kevin Phillips, originally a GOP operative who predicted the Republican ascendence with his book The Emerging Repblican Majority. Phillips has 'turned', evidently he does not like the Bush's. He has a new book out now - Bad Money - from which the following article is based:

Hard numbers: The economy is worse than you know

I don't want to start, or continue, a fight. I read these discussions with interest. I just wish to let folks know that there are problems with government's figures, because there is a long history of deception behind them. It has nothing to do with the type of government it is, left or right, democratic or not, socialist or not, and everything to do with the fact that it is government at all.

And if we eliminated corruption, the other factors might be alleviated or eliminated, don't you think?