37 thoughts on “Welfare!”

1. Misleading statistics are misleading.

2. As usual, you and the idiot Mitchketeers are not factually based and not multisourced like a real journalist, like me.

   Paul Krugman spoke to this recently, directly refuting everything you say, as usual.

   You are clearly an asshole for doubting a Nobel Prize Winning physicist.

   You Mitchketeers are all fat angry white men. In comparison, I am smokin’ hot and always more calm than you baby-raping conservative scum.

3. Oh, goodie. Haven’t had a sock puppet flame war for a while.

   Keep it legal, folks.

4. Define legal, no death threats?

5. Heh, a 2002 article. Ancient history in other words.

6. Linking the sock back to Pen’s blog is an especially nice touch.

7. “Linking the sock back to Pen’s blog is an especially nice touch.”

   now if they would only link to the nekid selfies on Instagram

8. As usual Mitch,, you are superficial and simplistic, and have to rely on your fantasy because you don’t have anything substantive and non-fiction.

   You point out some of the factors that offset how red states compare to blue states. But that is hardly substantive since you leave out all the ways the statement about red states and blue states are in fact true.

   If you are criticizing your fictional character for being superficial or simplistic about an economic topic, then you should point the same finger at yourself. And if you presume that Krugman hasn’t considered your arguments about red states, you are foolish and ill-informed.

   While you point out one factor in comparing red states to blue states, you are again simplistic. There are many factors to be considered, and plenty of others do point out to red states taking more, and needing more federal assistance than blue states – which do the paying – because red states have been losing ground due to the failures of conservative policies. These range from the failures of abstinence only sex ed to address successfully issues like unwanted teen pregnancies, to the failure of the conservatives to invest in innovative job creating education (Wisconsin comes to mind relative to Minnesota) and failures on investments in infrastructure maintenance and new development. It is not simply poverty, but the reasons for the failure of the red states to keep up, and WHY they need more federal spending on poverty that is the issue. And THAT is not how you define it — because you are intellectually dishonest, and a propaganda pusher.

   Here’s reality – blue state liberal policies promote job growth and better standards of living. Red states don’t. For example, right to work laws don’t deliver on the promises made for their passage.

   http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/31/opinion/campaign-stops/the-path-to-prosperity-is-blue.html?_r=0
   “That’s like portraying India as a beacon of prosperity because it has one of the biggest economies in the world and creates millions of jobs annually. Economic performance is measured in the lives of individuals, not aggregates.

   Another favorite approach is to cherry-pick a handful of red states with decent records and contrast them with the most troubled blue states. With Texas now stumbling as oil prices fall, the new conservative favorite is Utah.

   Utah’s low poverty rate and long life expectancy are impressive, but spotlighting a single state ignores the more numerous red states that dominate the lowest ranks of state performance — whether for life expectancy, obesity, rates of violent crime and incarceration, or labor force participation of prime-age workers.”
   http://www.epi.org/publication/right-to-work-states-have-lower-wages/

   https://wallethub.com/edu/states-most-least-dependent-on-the-federal-government/2700/

   http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2014/jul/29/facebook-posts/are-97-nations-100-poorest-counties-red-states/

9. Pingback: In The Mailbox: 08.12.16 : The Other McCain

10. DG,

    Again with the chanting points.

    As usual Mitch,, you are superficial and simplisticK

    Condescension doesn’t suit you. Mostly because you’re utterly unqualfied to do it.

    have to rely on your fantasy

    It’s called “satire”. Yet again. Does it ever sink in with you people?

    because you don’t have anything substantive and non-fiction.

    DG, somewhere along the line you seem to have gotten the idea that arrogance is a substitute for actually knowing anything. If you read some of the many, many replies to your comments that utterly shredded pretty much every assertion you’ve made in the last 6-7 years, you might somehow develop that thin film of humility that might make at least some of your writing worth reading, rather than the low comedy it’s turned into.

    And make no mistake – your writing is low comedy. Not satire.

    You point out some of the factors that offset how red states compare to blue states. But that is hardly substantive since you leave out all the ways the statement about red states and blue states are in fact true.

    And you, in turn, leave out all the ways it’s completely false!

    You seem to have it in your head that everything you write on every subject is the last word, by dint (apparently) of the fact that your words are the last you read on the subject.

    Let’s return to that next.

11. If you are criticizing your fictional character for being superficial or simplistic about an economic topic, then you should point the same finger at yourself.

    BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

    Oh, goodie. The old “I know you are but what am I?” argument. That’s just brilliant.

    OMG. Are you really that self-unaware?

12. From arrogance and unearned pseudointellectual entitlement, we move on to illogic:

    And if you presume that Krugman hasn’t considered your arguments about red states, you are foolish and ill-informed.

    Really?

    Can you provide some evidence to support this statement? Because there’s not the faintest hint of this consideration in anything he’s written on the subject.

    If you don’t have that evidence (and you never do. Ever. Seriously – as a “fact checker”, you are all talk), then all you’re doing is an “appeal to authority” . Read the link. You might (heh) learn something.

    Krugman compared gross products with gross tax revenues and expenditures. No more.

    Prove me wrong, or shut up.

13. While you point out one factor in comparing red states to blue states, you are again simplistic.

    We’ll see.

    There are many factors to be considered, and plenty of others do point out to red states taking more, and needing more federal assistance than blue states – which do the paying

    According to whom?

    One of your magical neighbors who is a world-class expert in the subject but who needs to remain anonymous?

    Prove it.

    because red states have been losing ground due to the failures of conservative policies.

    Wrong! As always!

    http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/compare_state_growth

    And in any case, gauging by states is another rookie flub – because many functional states are bogged down by Democrat-run cities.

14. And now, the daffy deflections, apparently added to add volume to the comment without any substance – so as to baffle with bullshit when dazzling with brilliance is off the table?

    These range from the failures of abstinence only sex ed to address successfully issues like unwanted teen pregnancies,

    Huh? WTF? Not exactly an economic issue, now, is it?

    to the failure of the conservatives to invest in innovative job creating education (Wisconsin comes to mind relative to Minnesota)

    DG, this is why I started whiting out your comments, and demanding that you read responses. The difference between MN and WI has nothing to do with ANYTHING you bring up. WI’s economy – saddled with the dead weight of Milwaukee – is based on rust-belt manufacturing, and still addled by decades of progressive control. Minnesota’s big-money economy is in financial services, insurance and healthcare – all industries that are growing and cashing in immense federal subsidies.

    On this, you are nothing more than ignorant.

15. and failures on investments in infrastructure maintenance and new development.

    What in the hell are you babbling about?

16. DG,

    You continue to parrot the same, long-debunked chanting points you were jabbering about years ago.

    In your arrogance, you wax snide about the “Mitchketeers” – who include several lawyers, an MD, a couple of engineers and scientists, an economist, and people who have actually accomplished things by knowing things. People who shred everything you write, every time they bother.

    Open your eyes and learn. You may not convert to conservatism – but you might be a less of a fever swampie.

17. DG you asserted without any citation ” the failure of the conservatives to invest in innovative job creating education (Wisconsin comes to mind relative to Minnesota) “
    Please name 3 “innovative job creating education” opportunities Minnesota has that Wisconsin lacks.
    If your forays into Wisconsin involved anything more than you drooling over Bouvier des Flandres bitches you would notice that WI, outside the Milwaukee to Chicago corridor has a thriving job market. Since Gov Walker spearheaded the transition of WI to a right-to-work state public and private union membership has dropped precipitously (search Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel for list of stories) and working middle class families are taking home hundreds of dollars of pay every month that used to be siphoned off as union dues. Best of all DG middle class citizens are making their own choices about who and what political entities they want to fund – can you even imagine what a sense of freedom that provides?

18. Right to work states have lower wages than union states. Probably true. But how many people in union states have jobs to receive those wonderful union wages? The old union saying “It’s better to have one man working for a fair wage than to have 100 men working for a dollar-an-hour less” is great for that one guy; but the other 99 were laid off and sit on unemployment because the manufacturer moved the plant to a right-to-work state.

19. Aw Mitch, you poor thing.

    Your poor little male brain cannot comprehend facts. Like the fact that I own you and this site. No one would come here if I didn’t add wisdom and knowledge. Plus, the idiot Mitchketeers all fantasize about me which is funny, because they are men, and I hate men, which is why I have dogs.

    Red states are crap. Don’t be simplistic, oh, and the facts are in on that, too. White conservative men are crap. And Trump, oh yes Mitch Trump is a Nazi bigot, as well I know. (Full disclosure; I am a consultint to the prestigus Elie Wiesel Foundation for Humanity). I have fact checked this many, many times.

    There are many factors to be considared, and plenty of smart liberals like me do consider them. And often.

    And how is that bathroom war going for you? You are losing and your precious guns will soon be gone, as the facts are on the right side of history. This is why, as we in the reality based community like to say, white men will soon be dead and all your base are belong to us. We reality based liberals like to admit we are scary smart, but we don’t say whip smart because that is mysoginistic and bigoted.

    I am seething and I hate the Mitchketeers, yet brilliant so, and yes a respected journalist.

20. Sorry Joe, your postiing is crap as usual. Women only make $.35 for every dollare some crappy white man makes. I have the facts, and I have checked them. I ma fact based, unlike white conservative men. Unions are fraternal orders of misogyny and bigotry. Soon, white men will be extinct and brown women (Muslims! How do you like that? Bwaaahahaha!), will be exploiting everyone.

21. Say Tom, were you wearing your ass-less chaps while stitching those words together?

22. What answer will make your wank better, Emery?

23. I think you massively overestimate how many wanks I give.

24. Hey, you miserable git, you were the one wondering out loud about my ass. You’re a cornhole dude; own it.

25. So Mitch, it occurred to me over the weekend, as I was watching Trump down 15% with Republican women, that your current agit prop was likely to offend the demographic of women, regardless of affiliation.

    I don’t know any women who are too stupid or foolish to put oil in their car; those who are anti-big oil simply use synthetic oil. Those who are anti-big oil also tend to drive hybrids or electric cars. The women I know, regardless of political affiliation, are all intelligent enough to carry their own fire extinguishers and are competent using them.

    This would have been much more on truth target had for example you created a scenario where a liberal driving an electric car could not find a place to recharge, and was therefore stranded in that kind of extremely rural location, say without cell service. Much more sympathetic.

    And unless I’m mistaken — I’m not by any stretch an expert on car engines — cars do NOT tend to catch on fire because of a failure to add oil. The engine might seize up, but not catch on fire. Now the right kind of engine leak, say onto a hot exhaust pipe might cause a fire, under the right circumstances. But that was not the scenario you presented. But I defer to any of your readers with more engine experience.

    Satire is only entertaining if you have the ring of truth; you are hitting false notes.

    I certainly can see you in the heroic good citizen role of coming to the aid of a motorist in distress (male or female). It is a character trait I admire in you and in a number of other conservatives I know. So if you want to promote yourself as a hero in your own fantasy, that rings true. It’s not terribly funny or satiric, but at least it makes more sense than a car fire.

    Looking at the latest data on the F-35, something I have followed for a number of years now, it did occur to me that you made a point for the liberal argument. Military spending on hardware like planes tends to be a boondoggle where earmarks are the determining factor, not need, not efficiency. The same goes for the placement of military bases. At just a quick guess and a very cursory check, those too tend to be located more often in red states, for no reason of specific military necessity — just a different form of federal welfare for economically struggling states that need the jobs and cash those military bases generate.

    Sauk Pantouche — I don’t tend to drool over Bouvie bitches, but I did train and groom a couple of deeries that took 5 point majors in Wisconsin recently to finish their championships in an exceptionally short period of time.

    Here are those examples you wanted. Walker cut spending at the WI University system, which was a great innovator and therefore job creator in Wisconsin. He then came up with a sweetheart corrupt deal for his co-campaign manager to get a new stadium on the public nickel. Corruption AND a poor use of those funds. He also has not put the necessary spending into road maintenance; infrastructure is a far bigger driver of economic growth than tax cuts, which do shit, and has done shit for the economy of Wisconsin. Indeed, some of the larger businesses have LEFT, and WI is doing poorly by most metrics.

    Here is just one article that addresses other examples of University level research resulting in job creation as a general premise:
    http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidkroll/2013/06/30/the-value-of-the-university-research-complex-in-job-creation/#67392e402865

    In contrast the U of MN has not faced similar cuts.

    And here is how the U of MN is helping to partner with business to take their research and turn it into new business opportunities (in other words, jobs).

    http://www.research.umn.edu/mn-ip/

    and here are not three, but 100 such examples:
    https://twin-cities.umn.edu/news-events/umn-launches-100th-startup-company-commercializing-technology-0

    Wisconsin is struggling, floundering, failing. You want sources? No problem, unlike agit prop, I have them, I don’t make up fantasy shit.

    From the Hill, if anything a right leaning media source, a little over a year ago:
    http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/presidential-campaign/247539-a-closer-look-at-wisconsins-economy-under-gov-scott

    July 13, 2015, 06:00 am
    A closer look at Wisconsin’s economy under Gov. Scott Walker

    Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker is looking for a new job but, unfortunately, so are too many of his constituents.

    After running on the promise to create 250,000 new private sector jobs by the end of his first term, Walker didn’t just fail to meet this goal, he failed miserably, creating barely half of his promised amount.

    Walker has implemented a failed economic strategy, based on basic and failed Republican economic principals, that has left Wisconsin lagging behind peer states.

    Even just a glance at economic metrics in Wisconsin tells a story of stifled job growth, ballooning deficits, and a shrinking middle class.

    When looking for reasons why Walker may have failed so miserably at creating jobs in Wisconsin, the obvious place to look would be his flagship job creation agency: The Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation (WEDC). WEDC, which Walker chaired, gave out taxpayer-funded loans to hundreds of companies in the hopes of spurring growth. But the jobs Walker promised never materialized. Instead, in an epic display of mismanagement, WEDC lost track of millions of dollars in loans, gave awards to ineligible businesses, and has generally been a poor steward of taxpayers’ money.

    In terms of job growth, Wisconsin has consistently trailed the national average. In fact, Wisconsin only saw 1.5 percent private-sector job growth in 2014. Unfortunately for Wisconsinites, while this is the best job creation number Walker has seen throughout his entire time in office, it lags far behind the national growth rate of 2.6 percent.

    How big a failure have Walkernomics been? Just look next door at Democratic Gov. Mark Dayton’s Minnesota, which leads Wisconsin in almost every economic indicator.

    In Minnesota, Dayton turned a $5 billion budget deficit into an over $1 billion budget surplus in just one term. By requiring the wealthiest earners to pay their fair share, Minnesota is now in a position to invest more resources into the state’s schools and infrastructure.

    In Wisconsin, Walker was unable to take his state out of the red and faced a $2 billion budget deficit. Walker made the decision to cut taxes for millionaires and billionaires, while slashing education funding and refusing to make investments that would benefit middle class families and Wisconsin’s financial well-being.

    In Minnesota, Dayton has moved forward Democratic policies like increasing the minimum wage, expanding Medicaid, and investing in the middle class, and now we are seen as one of the most business friendly states in the country. Just this year, Forbes ranked Minnesota as the 9th best state for business and careers, 7th in economic climate and 2nd in quality of life. On top of all that, CNBC just ranked Minnesota the country’s top state for business in 2015.”

26. DG,

    Your thread-jacking is as subtle and nuanced as a German jazz band.

    I’m not going to respond to your entire comment – because you’ll never read it, and I’m about to go back to whiting you out because of it.

    But this comment is proof that you really don’t do anything but parrot “progressive” institutional chanting points.

    First: Dayton “eliminated” no deficit. The GOP House and Senate did, by holding off the worst of Goofy’s spending and imposing some sort of fiscal discipline.

    Second: Wisconsin is doing fine, outside the stretch from Milwaukee to the Illinois border, which preserves, like a museum of bad statist ideas, the worst of fifty years of “progressive” government. And again – much of Wisconsin’s economy is rust-belt manufacturing, while Minnesota’s is in fields that are either prosperous (medical and service industries) or heavily subsidized (healthcare, financial services).

    Show us you’re not a complete parrot, DG. Go for it.

27. Prove me wrong, or shut up.

    Fat chance on both counts.

28. I’m just surprised DG actually responded to something Mitch posted. Its a step in the right direction, I think..,

29. I did train and groom a couple of deeries that took 5 point majors in Wisconsin recently to finish their championships in an exceptionally short period of time.

    That is a God.Damned.Lie. Callin’ you out, you wretched creature.

    Email the details to Mitch, right now, and he can either prove me wrong, or don’t and we can all enjoy making the scum you swim in a little murkier.

30. “The women I know, regardless of political affiliation, are all intelligent enough to carry their own fire extinguishers and are competent using them.”

    DG: I’ll give you a Sacagawea dollar coin for every women you can prove you knew and who had a fire extinguisher in her car, before Mitch posted this column.

    It’s not a matter of knowing how to use one, it’s a matter of having one on-board when you need it. I do not know one woman who equipped her car with a fire extinguisher, never even heard of one. If a woman has a fire extinguisher in her car at all, a man bought it and installed it for her.

    “Satire is only entertaining if you have the ring of truth; you are hitting false notes.” Accusing someone of sexism is only plausible you have the ring of truth; you are hitting false notes, DG, with your mythical Girl Guides.

31. DG crowed: I don’t tend to drool over Bouvie bitches, but I did train and groom a couple of deeries that took 5 point majors in Wisconsin recently to finish their championships in an exceptionally short period of time.”

    I’m with swiftee on this one. It simply didn’t happen.

32. DG,

    The women I know, regardless of political affiliation, are all intelligent enough to carry their own fire extinguishers and are competent using them.

    a) I doubt it.
    b) Why do you assume Avery Librelle is a woman?

    Where have I ever listed Librelle’s gender?

    Fascinating assumption, DG.

33. Excuse me, you lying wretch, please bend forward so I can smack your muzzle with this FACTCHECK:

    Minnesota, where the economy is not even average
    Minnesotans can’t be complacent when these data show that productivity and job growth are falling, and falling behind.

    Oh yeah, it’s bad…

    New research indicates that over the last 15 years, Minnesota has been average with regard to economic growth; below average with respect to private-sector productivity; 30th among the states in per-capita income growth, and 28th in the rate of job creation.Similarly, the Twin Cities metropolitan area ranks average or below average among the nation’s 15 major metropolitan areas in rates of economic growth and job creation.

    http://www.startribune.com/minnesota-where-the-economy-is-not-even-average/390041541/

    “This is the conclusion of a groundbreaking paper by Joseph Kennedy, former chief economist for the U.S. Department of Commerce”

    Stupidity and lying are no way to go through life, unless you’re a Democrat.

34. DG, if you’re down below your last 2 quarts of oil that means; your engine is running hot, the oil is nearing its boiling point and is loosing viscosity, so your engine is combusting poorly, which means your catalytic converter is clogging up and probably running 400-600 degrees hotter than it should and with a hot engine that means the gas line is heating the fuel on the way to the injectors, with those conditions (engine operating out of spec) it doesn’t take much for a fitting or a gasket to fail.

    You are the one who presents yourself as an expert on insurance matters – go look up the top ten reasons for engine compartment fires.

    The woman who puts a fire extinguisher in her car is the one who checks her oil before driving through the SD badlands on a hot August day.

35. DG said: “The same goes for the placement of military bases. At just a quick guess and a very cursory check, those too tend to be located more often in red states, for no reason of specific military necessity — just a different form of federal welfare for economically struggling states that need the jobs and cash those military bases generate.”

    I’d like to see the proof that locations for military bases was decided by the voting record of the surrounding community, rather than cost or military necessity.

    For example, we could move nuclear missile silos from North Dakota to Detroit. That would shift funding from a Red state to a Blue state. But is that really where you want Soviet anti-missile nukes targeted? It’s not a red state-blue state issue, it’s a minimize-casualties issue.

    Fort Bragg, the largest US military base, was bought because the Army needed a new artillery firing range close to rail lines to ship artillery shells. Sure, the whole fort is only 20 square miles or so, about the size of Manhattan Island which also is close to rail lines; but the cost of acquisition of empty land in North Carolina was a miniscule fraction of buying New York. Again, not a red state-blue state issue, a cost issue.

    It’s easy to make accusations. I’ve offered plausible explanations to rebut them. I’m ready for you to step up with proof that I’m wrong.

36. This thread has given me eye cancer

37. DogGone, I am going to enjoy pointing this out, but having lived around Boulder for over a decade, I am very familiar with liberals who fail to practice adequate vehicle maintenance. It seemed, really, that the official vehicle of Boulder environmentalists was a battered Subaru with visible emissions. And yes, lack of oil changes does degrade the fit of piston rings, leading to burning of oil–and that is indeed a vicious cycle that will lead to things like engine fires.

    And yes, if you’re too darned lazy to get your car to Jiffy Lube to get oil changes, and too darned cheap to get things fixed so the old Sub doesn’t have visible emissions, five will get you ten there isn’t a fire extinguisher in the car, either.

    By the way, your “the Hill” link is by R.T. Rybak, hardly a conservative. For someone who claims to participate in journalism, you’d think you’d have learned to read and comprehend the name credit at the head of an editorial, but apparently not. Sorry, DG, but a hit piece by a liberal wonk does not amount to anything we ought to pay attention to, especially since Rybak doesn’t list sources.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.