FREE TAPATALK APP

theprestige · 2nd August 2012, 04:07 PM

Originally Posted by Corsair 115

What do you call it when the government is providing the job? Like, say, all those employed by the Army, Navy, Marines, Air Force, Coast Guard, or FBI?

I call it people being paid to do useful work, and people earning their pay by doing useful work. Why? Do you call it a government handout?

tyr_13 · 2nd August 2012, 04:24 PM

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

I told you why they charge different rates. I never claimed or suggested that there was anything wrong with them charging different rates. So why did you ascribe to me a position I never expressed? Why did YOU evade that question?

So that means the politics in Texas aren't 'bad', and people agree with them?

I chose not to engage you on the 'demand is the only factor' (it isn't), or about how U-haul isn't the only company, etc. No, that's all irrelevant. How does that tie into the complaint in the op? If I went to a popular beach and complained that the flies were terrible, would a valid response be to point out that the water salesman is selling at more than a dollar a bottle?

Why does Chewbacca live on Endor?

Ziggurat · 2nd August 2012, 04:32 PM

Originally Posted by tyr_13

So that means the politics in Texas aren't 'bad', and people agree with them?

I already answered your question, starting with post #30. You may be interested in following up with posts 32, 35, and 37, but there's no point in answering your question again if you can't even address the answer I gave the first time.

Quote:

If I went to a popular beach and complained that the flies were terrible, would a valid response be to point out that the water salesman is selling at more than a dollar a bottle?

The valid response would be that you still chose to go to the beach.

tyr_13 · 2nd August 2012, 04:36 PM

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

I already answered your question, starting with post #30. You may be interested in following up with posts 32, 35, and 37, but there's no point in answering your question again if you can't even address the answer I gave the first time.

What answer? It still has nothing to do with the op's complaints. If you agree that it doesn't actually address what was said in the op, as a generous reading of your posts would say, then you agree that you simply are posting red herrings.

Quote:

The valid response would be that you still chose to go to the beach.

Which doesn't mean that the flies aren't bad.

Ziggurat · 2nd August 2012, 04:47 PM

Originally Posted by tyr_13

What answer? It still has nothing to do with the op's complaints.

It's got a lot to do with the OP's complaint. I already explained why.

Quote:

Which doesn't mean that the flies aren't bad.

It means that they aren't bad enough to keep you from going to the beach.

jj · 2nd August 2012, 04:54 PM

Originally Posted by AlBell

Please explain why you believe that's the 'actual issue at hand'. It isn't.

So, an issue raised falsely, presented with an absurd argument, by another person, to which I replied in context, is not the "issue at hand"?

That is obviously false and an attempt to misrepresent context.

tyr_13 · 2nd August 2012, 05:05 PM

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

It's got a lot to do with the OP's complaint. I already explained why.

Which was stretching. You claim it has a lot to do with it, but really it doesn't. You said.

Quote:

It means that people think Texas is a good place to live. Whether or not they like Texas politics, it's pretty clear that they don't share Tricky's perspective.

This isn't actually a valid conclusion to draw from the 'data' you presented, and doesn't address Tricky's complaints in the least. Remember that Tricky seems to argue that the politics are bad and are getting worse. In fact that they're going to get a lot worse. So the politics might not be keeping people away right now, but that doesn't mean the politics aren't a problem, that they aren't getting worse, or that they don't share Tricky's perspective. Tricky shares his perspective and lives in Texas. It's absurd to claim that because someone lives in or moves to Texas they must not share his perspective therefore.

Quote:

It means that they aren't bad enough to keep you from going to the beach.

The flies are getting worse, but that's not actually a problem because people are still here? It's still a red herring combined with a type of appeal to worse problems. Just because it isn't enough to make one leave or stay away, doesn't invalidate or lessen the criticism.

mhaze · 2nd August 2012, 06:03 PM

Originally Posted by tyr_13

Which was stretching. You claim it has a lot to do with it, but really it doesn't. You said.

This isn't actually a valid conclusion to draw from the 'data' you presented, and doesn't address Tricky's complaints in the least. Remember that Tricky seems to argue that the politics are bad and are getting worse. In fact that they're going to get a lot worse. So the politics might not be keeping people away right now, but that doesn't mean the politics aren't a problem, that they aren't getting worse, or that they don't share Tricky's perspective. Tricky shares his perspective and lives in Texas. It's absurd to claim that because someone lives in or moves to Texas they must not share his perspective therefore.

The flies are getting worse, but that's not actually a problem because people are still here? It's still a red herring combined with a type of appeal to worse problems. Just because it isn't enough to make one leave or stay away, doesn't invalidate or lessen the criticism.

Bah. You're making things up in an imaginary world, not even in the real world. We've got 60,000 some jobs expected to need to be filled just in the fracking operations in Eagle Ford in South Texas in the next two years.

That's an average of 80k per man.

Pop all those internet word soap bubbles you want, people are moving here every day.

Ziggurat · 2nd August 2012, 06:19 PM

Originally Posted by tyr_13

This isn't actually a valid conclusion to draw from the 'data' you presented

Yes it is. When people think somewhere is a bad place to live, they leave. We see that not only within the US, but across the globe. That's why one could conclude (correctly) that communism was worse than capitalism without needing to know much at all except which system had to kill people to keep them from leaving.

Quote:

and doesn't address Tricky's complaints in the least.

Sure it does. Tricky is worried about Texas, and what politics there will mean for the state. But what exactly do those politics mean? Are you claiming that politics will start driving people out of Texas? Because until that happens (as it already has in Detroit, for example), well, the politics really aren't that bad. Particularly relative to the rest of the country.

Corsair 115 · 2nd August 2012, 08:40 PM

Originally Posted by theprestige

I call it people being paid to do useful work, and people earning their pay by doing useful work. Why? Do you call it a government handout?

AlBell appears to be the one implying it is a handout. At least, he did not respond directly to my question on that point. My position on the matter would be the same as yours.

DavidJames · 2nd August 2012, 08:47 PM

Ziggurat - I've asked to have the whole discussion about why people emigrate be split off to a more suitable forum.

I would be interested in any comments you have about the political contest referred to in the OP, if you have any.

tyr_13 · 2nd August 2012, 08:57 PM

Originally Posted by mhaze

Bah. You're making things up in an imaginary world, not even in the real world. We've got 60,000 some jobs expected to need to be filled just in the fracking operations in Eagle Ford in South Texas in the next two years.

That's an average of 80k per man.

Pop all those internet word soap bubbles you want, people are moving here every day.

That doesn't address anything I said. Point out what I 'made up'.

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

Yes it is. When people think somewhere is a bad place to live, they leave. We see that not only within the US, but across the globe. That's why one could conclude (correctly) that communism was worse than capitalism without needing to know much at all except which system had to kill people to keep them from leaving.

Appeal to worse problems, a fallacy. Just because something isn't bad enough doesn't mean some subset of that can't be bad and a problem worth addressing, and getting worse. 'People leaving' isn't the only possible adverse effect from a problem. You also make the jump from 'politics being bad and suggesting doing bad things' to, 'bad place to live'. Goalpost moving.

So why does Chewbacca live on Endor?

Quote:

Sure it does. Tricky is worried about Texas, and what politics there will mean for the state. But what exactly do those politics mean? Are you claiming that politics will start driving people out of Texas? Because until that happens (as it already has in Detroit, for example), well, the politics really aren't that bad. Particularly relative to the rest of the country.

Appeal to worst problems. Really, this is a foolish line of reasoning on multiple levels. 'This hasn't brought about negative enough consequences yet, so it's not bad enough to discuss.' That's basically what you're saying to avoid discussing any of the actual politics and policies complained about in the OP. That you have to resort to Detroit as an example might tell you how far into the 'appeal to worse problems' line of reasoning you are in.

theprestige · 3rd August 2012, 02:33 AM

Originally Posted by Corsair 115

AlBell appears to be the one implying it is a handout.

Really? I don't see him implying anything of the kind. Can you point out exactly where he appears to do so?

Quote:

At least, he did not respond directly to my question on that point.

Well, to be fair, it's kind of a stupid question. It kind of looks like you're more interested in playing silly buggers over an imaginary difference of opinion, than in having a serious discussion. So it's understandable if he prefers to ignore the question rather than answer it.

Quote:

My position on the matter would be the same as yours.

And as far as I can tell, there's no evidence it's any different from Al's position. Do you have any reason to believe that AlBell can't tell the difference between a handout and a job? If not, why ask the question?

mhaze · 3rd August 2012, 05:29 AM

Originally Posted by tyr_13

That doesn't address anything I said. Point out what I 'made up'.
.....

No, I admit that. I didn't address the nonsense about "politics are getting worse" because it was clearly just a statement by another to the effect that "elections are not going for my candidate".

I don't think people move because of politics of one sort or another, in most cases. They may move because of the EFFECTS of those such as more or fewer jobs or opportunities, more or less of a pro-business attitude, more or less taxes, presence or absence of state taxes. A lot of the people moving to Texas are bent to the liberal side politically.

But just give us some time, we'll educatify them.

Stellafane · 3rd August 2012, 07:25 AM

Texas is about to elect a Tea Party senator? No sweat -- my state has a socialist senator; the two of them will just cancel each other out. You're welcome.

cwalner · 3rd August 2012, 07:39 AM

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

I never claimed it was. But it's not keeping people away, and it's not driving them out.

We don't really know that. We just know that whatever effect it has is minor and is overshadowed by other drivers. It could very well be that the growth would be greater if Texas wasn't so supportive of Tea Party ideals (and also possible that it would be lesser).

That is the great challenge with social science - isolating the variables to truly test a hypothesis.

As an example, I can take myself personally. While I do not really like what I hear about the politics of Texas, that is not what is preventing me from moving to Houston. I would not want to live anywhere on the gulf coast because it it is just too damn humid for my tastes (I can barely stand the humidity here in Indiana). Yet all that being said, if I could earn significantly more there than I could here, I would still consider it. However, I would also take a pay cut to move back to Nevada or California, some nice, dry states

Ziggurat · 3rd August 2012, 07:48 AM

Originally Posted by cwalner

We don't really know that. We just know that whatever effect it has is minor and is overshadowed by other drivers.

I'll accept that, but it's close enough for my purposes.

Corsair 115 · 3rd August 2012, 11:58 AM

Originally Posted by theprestige

Really? I don't see him implying anything of the kind. Can you point out exactly where he appears to do so?

Well, I did, hence my question, asked for clarification so as to get a better handle on this view. That is sort of the point of a dialogue, isn't it, when there are perhaps differences or uncertainties on certain items?

Originally Posted by theprestige

Well, to be fair, it's kind of a stupid question. It kind of looks like you're more interested in playing silly buggers over an imaginary difference of opinion, than in having a serious discussion.

AlBell's the one who brought up the idea of jobs over handouts. It is not reasonable to ask exactly what that means? Hence my question, which provided an example of the government providing jobs. It's not my fault if the comment to which I responded was phrased in a way that seemed to me to be vague and imprecise.

mhaze · 3rd August 2012, 01:10 PM

Originally Posted by Stellafane

Texas is about to elect a Tea Party senator? No sweat -- my state has a socialist senator; the two of them will just cancel each other out. You're welcome.

Thanks. Is your socialist senator having fun watching all those UHauls driving out of his state?

NoahFence · 3rd August 2012, 01:21 PM

Quote:

How bad could it get? Well, Texas is one of the few states where Sarah Palin could easily get elected.

Don't give her any ideas....

Stellafane · 3rd August 2012, 02:49 PM

Originally Posted by mhaze

Thanks. Is your socialist senator having fun watching all those UHauls driving out of his state?

Hard to say; I think he's too busy reading his press clippings and telling everyone how great he is. And in any case, there's not a lot of UHauls around here these days, since most of the people have already left. (Although to be fair, Vermont's current unemployment rate is considerably lower than Texas's).

AlBell · 3rd August 2012, 03:36 PM

Originally Posted by Biscuit

...

ETA: I don't think the extreme teabagger politics of Texas is what is drawing new immigrants to settle there.

True. It's the jobs and growing economy likely due to Texas tea party ideals in action. The oil business does make money and provide good paying jobs. That in turn leads to added economic growth.

tyr_13 · 3rd August 2012, 03:43 PM

Originally Posted by theprestige

Seems kind of strange to complain about appeals to worse problems, when the question at hand is what problem do people actually think is worse...

... Me? I prefer an hour with a full bladder to a minute with a kidney stone. Oh, wait--appeal to worse problems, a fallacy! Guess I should prefer the kidney stone instead.

No, appeal to worse problems would be saying that you shouldn't talk about or criticize having a full bladder because you don't have a kidney stone.

And as what you identify as the question at hand actually isn't then I'd say that the red herring has been pretty successful.

Tricky · 3rd August 2012, 05:08 PM

This thread has taken an odd turn (which I hope will be split to its own thread) but my point in the OP was not that Texas is a horrible place. I've lived here more than half my life, and for the most part it has been pretty good. It has provided me constant employment and affordable living circumstances. But that doesn't mean I like the politics. Have those politics made the state successful? Well, it's hard to say. The low taxes have certainly attracted businesses, as have the lax enforcement of pollution laws and the "nod nod wink wink" attitude toward business that hire illegal immigrants. But I have a good job with an international company. For the poor, it is not as pretty a sight. Worst education, worst health care, and some of the worst poverty in the nation. If this is what it takes to be a "success" then, in my opinion, it's not worth it.

Whether or not they can continue walking this thin line between success and disaster is yet to be seen, but I don't want to be represented by the Tea Party. I think they are one of the worst things ever to happen to this country.

mhaze · 3rd August 2012, 05:17 PM

Originally Posted by Tricky

This thread has taken an odd turn (which I hope will be split to its own thread) but my point in the OP was not that Texas is a horrible place. I've lived here more than half my life, and for the most part it has been pretty good. It has provided me constant employment and affordable living circumstances. But that doesn't mean I like the politics. Have those politics made the state successful? ......

Good point.

Now.

Has politics made Chicago successful?

BWHAHAHAAHAHA!

jj · 3rd August 2012, 05:33 PM

Originally Posted by mhaze

Good point.

Now.

Has politics made Chicago successful?

BWHAHAHAAHAHA!

I don't know, it looks pretty successful from most peoples' point of view. You are making fun of Chicago, I can tell, but now tell me, what do you know about Chicago? Have you lived there for 10 years? Can you explain why you think Chicago is unsuccessful?

This is especially hard for you, I'm sure, because Chicago is quite successful. You may not like the mayor, but that's just part of the Republican "anything but Obama" campaign.

Ziggurat · 3rd August 2012, 05:41 PM

Originally Posted by Tricky

Worst education, worst health care, and some of the worst poverty in the nation

That part is simply not true.

Tricky · 3rd August 2012, 07:04 PM

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

That part is simply not true.

All right. I retract that claim. They are not last in education, and by some measures they are doing pretty well, though mostly because of higher education, not so much lower grades. But I was wrong on that and I admit it.

bpesta22 · 3rd August 2012, 10:09 PM

For the 50 US states, Texas ranks:

38 Global well-being
11 fundamentalist religious beliefs
5 Crime
24 Education
31.5 Health
41 income
30 IQ
4 inmates per capita

http://www.people.vcu.edu/~mamcdani/...%282010%29.pdf

balrog666 · 4th August 2012, 07:43 PM

Originally Posted by bpesta22

For the 50 US states, Texas ranks:

38 Global well-being
11 fundamentalist religious beliefs
5 Crime
24 Education
31.5 Health
41 income
30 IQ
4 inmates per capita

http://www.people.vcu.edu/~mamcdani/...%282010%29.pdf

Well, gosh, however could they be beating Kalifornia by 40-to-1 then?

mhaze · 4th August 2012, 10:31 PM

It's just all those darned folks in their UHails moving down here dragging our scores down.

tyr_13 · 4th August 2012, 10:38 PM

Originally Posted by balrog666

Well, gosh, however could they be beating Kalifornia by 40-to-1 then?

40 to 1 in what?

Tricky · 4th August 2012, 10:42 PM

Originally Posted by tyr_13

40 to 1 in what?

Faux cowboys.

UnrepentantSinner · 4th August 2012, 11:17 PM

I saw a little blub on the local news crawl that while Dewhurst had most of his funding from within the state, most of Cruz's came from external sources.

Thank you Citizens United.

Ziggurat · 4th August 2012, 11:26 PM

Originally Posted by UnrepentantSinner

I saw a little blub on the local news crawl that while Dewhurst had most of his funding from within the state, most of Cruz's came from external sources.

Thank you Citizens United.

Citizens United had zero effect on campaign contributions, because the case had nothing to do with campaign contributions. It has no bearing on the subject you refer to,

UnrepentantSinner · 4th August 2012, 11:48 PM

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

Citizens United had zero effect on campaign contributions, because the case had nothing to do with campaign contributions. It has no bearing on the subject you refer to,

Yep, my mistake. I used funding which would refer to the campains. I meant to say "money" meaning all the ads by PACs and SuperPACs.

So I was correct when I referred to Citizens United and merely used poor phrasing in the first sentence.

http://www.statesman.com/news/texas-...r-2426379.html

mhaze · 5th August 2012, 07:26 AM

Originally Posted by UnrepentantSinner

I saw a little blub on the local news crawl that while Dewhurst had most of his funding from within the state, most of Cruz's came from external sources.

Thank you Citizens United.

Ever take a look at Democratic congressmens' contributions? In Tx, a non union state for the most part, the Demo congressmen routinely get numerous donations from national unions, who don't have anything to do with their district.

RandFan · 5th August 2012, 07:37 AM

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

Citizens United had zero effect on campaign contributions, because the case had nothing to do with campaign contributions. It has no bearing on the subject you refer to,

A bit pedantic isn't it? Don't super PACs spend money to further campaigns (they just cannot coordinate the spending of money with the candidate), right?

UnrepentantSinner · 5th August 2012, 08:18 AM

Originally Posted by mhaze

Ever take a look at Democratic congressmens' contributions? In Tx, a non union state for the most part, the Demo congressmen routinely get numerous donations from national unions, who don't have anything to do with their district.

I'm not interested in your Dem/Rep tu quoque non sequitor. I was specifically referring to Dewhurst v. Cruz.

Thanks for nothing.

mhaze · 5th August 2012, 11:37 AM

Originally Posted by UnrepentantSinner

I'm not interested in your Dem/Rep tu quoque non sequitor. I was specifically referring to Dewhurst v. Cruz.

Thanks for nothing.

You are most welcome.

Get used to it.

2nd August 2012, 04:07 PM	#41
theprestige Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 8,888	Originally Posted by Corsair 115 What do you call it when the government is providing the job? Like, say, all those employed by the Army, Navy, Marines, Air Force, Coast Guard, or FBI? I call it people being paid to do useful work, and people earning their pay by doing useful work. Why? Do you call it a government handout?
theprestige Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 8,888

2nd August 2012, 04:24 PM	#42
tyr_13 Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Falconer, NY Posts: 9,774	Originally Posted by Ziggurat I told you why they charge different rates. I never claimed or suggested that there was anything wrong with them charging different rates. So why did you ascribe to me a position I never expressed? Why did YOU evade that question? So that means the politics in Texas aren't 'bad', and people agree with them? I chose not to engage you on the 'demand is the only factor' (it isn't), or about how U-haul isn't the only company, etc. No, that's all irrelevant. How does that tie into the complaint in the op? If I went to a popular beach and complained that the flies were terrible, would a valid response be to point out that the water salesman is selling at more than a dollar a bottle? Why does Chewbacca live on Endor?
	__________________ Circled nothing is still nothing. "Nothing will stop the U.S. from being a world leader, not even a handful of adults who want their kids to take science lessons from a book that mentions unicorns six times." -UNLoVedRebel Mumpsimus: a stubborn person who insists on making an error in spite of being shown that it is wrong

2nd August 2012, 04:32 PM	#43
Ziggurat Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 26,285	Originally Posted by tyr_13 So that means the politics in Texas aren't 'bad', and people agree with them? I already answered your question, starting with post #30. You may be interested in following up with posts 32, 35, and 37, but there's no point in answering your question again if you can't even address the answer I gave the first time. Quote: If I went to a popular beach and complained that the flies were terrible, would a valid response be to point out that the water salesman is selling at more than a dollar a bottle? The valid response would be that you still chose to go to the beach.
	__________________ "As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law

2nd August 2012, 04:36 PM	#44
tyr_13 Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Falconer, NY Posts: 9,774	Originally Posted by Ziggurat I already answered your question, starting with post #30. You may be interested in following up with posts 32, 35, and 37, but there's no point in answering your question again if you can't even address the answer I gave the first time. What answer? It still has nothing to do with the op's complaints. If you agree that it doesn't actually address what was said in the op, as a generous reading of your posts would say, then you agree that you simply are posting red herrings. Quote: The valid response would be that you still chose to go to the beach. Which doesn't mean that the flies aren't bad.
	__________________ Circled nothing is still nothing. "Nothing will stop the U.S. from being a world leader, not even a handful of adults who want their kids to take science lessons from a book that mentions unicorns six times." -UNLoVedRebel Mumpsimus: a stubborn person who insists on making an error in spite of being shown that it is wrong

2nd August 2012, 04:47 PM	#45
Ziggurat Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 26,285	Originally Posted by tyr_13 What answer? It still has nothing to do with the op's complaints. It's got a lot to do with the OP's complaint. I already explained why. Quote: Which doesn't mean that the flies aren't bad. It means that they aren't bad enough to keep you from going to the beach.
	__________________ "As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law

2nd August 2012, 04:54 PM	#46
jj grumpy old skeptic Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Deep in the rain Posts: 18,711	Originally Posted by AlBell Please explain why you believe that's the 'actual issue at hand'. It isn't. So, an issue raised falsely, presented with an absurd argument, by another person, to which I replied in context, is not the "issue at hand"? That is obviously false and an attempt to misrepresent context.
	__________________ The Power to Quit

2nd August 2012, 05:05 PM	#47
tyr_13 Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Falconer, NY Posts: 9,774	Originally Posted by Ziggurat It's got a lot to do with the OP's complaint. I already explained why. Which was stretching. You claim it has a lot to do with it, but really it doesn't. You said. Quote: It means that people think Texas is a good place to live. Whether or not they like Texas politics, it's pretty clear that they don't share Tricky's perspective. This isn't actually a valid conclusion to draw from the 'data' you presented, and doesn't address Tricky's complaints in the least. Remember that Tricky seems to argue that the politics are bad and are getting worse. In fact that they're going to get a lot worse. So the politics might not be keeping people away right now, but that doesn't mean the politics aren't a problem, that they aren't getting worse, or that they don't share Tricky's perspective. Tricky shares his perspective and lives in Texas. It's absurd to claim that because someone lives in or moves to Texas they must not share his perspective therefore. Quote: It means that they aren't bad enough to keep you from going to the beach. The flies are getting worse, but that's not actually a problem because people are still here? It's still a red herring combined with a type of appeal to worse problems. Just because it isn't enough to make one leave or stay away, doesn't invalidate or lessen the criticism.
	__________________ Circled nothing is still nothing. "Nothing will stop the U.S. from being a world leader, not even a handful of adults who want their kids to take science lessons from a book that mentions unicorns six times." -UNLoVedRebel Mumpsimus: a stubborn person who insists on making an error in spite of being shown that it is wrong

2nd August 2012, 06:03 PM	#48
mhaze Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Woo*(+-1.10)^20=AGWwoo Posts: 15,400	Originally Posted by tyr_13 Which was stretching. You claim it has a lot to do with it, but really it doesn't. You said. This isn't actually a valid conclusion to draw from the 'data' you presented, and doesn't address Tricky's complaints in the least. Remember that Tricky seems to argue that the politics are bad and are getting worse. In fact that they're going to get a lot worse. So the politics might not be keeping people away right now, but that doesn't mean the politics aren't a problem, that they aren't getting worse, or that they don't share Tricky's perspective. Tricky shares his perspective and lives in Texas. It's absurd to claim that because someone lives in or moves to Texas they must not share his perspective therefore. The flies are getting worse, but that's not actually a problem because people are still here? It's still a red herring combined with a type of appeal to worse problems. Just because it isn't enough to make one leave or stay away, doesn't invalidate or lessen the criticism. Bah. You're making things up in an imaginary world, not even in the real world. We've got 60,000 some jobs expected to need to be filled just in the fracking operations in Eagle Ford in South Texas in the next two years. That's an average of 80k per man. Pop all those internet word soap bubbles you want, people are moving here every day.
	__________________ Get your climate widget Climategate - History's Biggest Scam Poptech's List Climate Acronyms

2nd August 2012, 06:19 PM	#49
Ziggurat Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 26,285	Originally Posted by tyr_13 This isn't actually a valid conclusion to draw from the 'data' you presented Yes it is. When people think somewhere is a bad place to live, they leave. We see that not only within the US, but across the globe. That's why one could conclude (correctly) that communism was worse than capitalism without needing to know much at all except which system had to kill people to keep them from leaving. Quote: and doesn't address Tricky's complaints in the least. Sure it does. Tricky is worried about Texas, and what politics there will mean for the state. But what exactly do those politics mean? Are you claiming that politics will start driving people out of Texas? Because until that happens (as it already has in Detroit, for example), well, the politics really aren't that bad. Particularly relative to the rest of the country.
	__________________ "As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law

2nd August 2012, 08:40 PM	#50
Corsair 115 Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Tranquility Base Posts: 8,675	Originally Posted by theprestige I call it people being paid to do useful work, and people earning their pay by doing useful work. Why? Do you call it a government handout? AlBell appears to be the one implying it is a handout. At least, he did not respond directly to my question on that point. My position on the matter would be the same as yours.
	__________________ "We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things not because they are easy, but because they are hard. Because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our abilities and skills, because that challenge is one we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win."

2nd August 2012, 08:47 PM	#51
DavidJames Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Front Range, CO Posts: 7,116	Ziggurat - I've asked to have the whole discussion about why people emigrate be split off to a more suitable forum. I would be interested in any comments you have about the political contest referred to in the OP, if you have any.
	__________________ I will no longer respond to those who choose to have tools of murder as their avatars. Everyone is a skeptic except, of course, for the stuff that they believe Beaver Hateman: Is your argument that human life loses value proportionate to the number of humans available? Malcolm Kirkpatrick: That's part of the argument. Value is determined by supply and demand.

2nd August 2012, 08:57 PM	#52
tyr_13 Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Falconer, NY Posts: 9,774	Originally Posted by mhaze Bah. You're making things up in an imaginary world, not even in the real world. We've got 60,000 some jobs expected to need to be filled just in the fracking operations in Eagle Ford in South Texas in the next two years. That's an average of 80k per man. Pop all those internet word soap bubbles you want, people are moving here every day. That doesn't address anything I said. Point out what I 'made up'. Originally Posted by Ziggurat Yes it is. When people think somewhere is a bad place to live, they leave. We see that not only within the US, but across the globe. That's why one could conclude (correctly) that communism was worse than capitalism without needing to know much at all except which system had to kill people to keep them from leaving. Appeal to worse problems, a fallacy. Just because something isn't bad enough doesn't mean some subset of that can't be bad and a problem worth addressing, and getting worse. 'People leaving' isn't the only possible adverse effect from a problem. You also make the jump from 'politics being bad and suggesting doing bad things' to, 'bad place to live'. Goalpost moving. So why does Chewbacca live on Endor? Quote: Sure it does. Tricky is worried about Texas, and what politics there will mean for the state. But what exactly do those politics mean? Are you claiming that politics will start driving people out of Texas? Because until that happens (as it already has in Detroit, for example), well, the politics really aren't that bad. Particularly relative to the rest of the country. Appeal to worst problems. Really, this is a foolish line of reasoning on multiple levels. 'This hasn't brought about negative enough consequences yet, so it's not bad enough to discuss.' That's basically what you're saying to avoid discussing any of the actual politics and policies complained about in the OP. That you have to resort to Detroit as an example might tell you how far into the 'appeal to worse problems' line of reasoning you are in.
	__________________ Circled nothing is still nothing. "Nothing will stop the U.S. from being a world leader, not even a handful of adults who want their kids to take science lessons from a book that mentions unicorns six times." -UNLoVedRebel Mumpsimus: a stubborn person who insists on making an error in spite of being shown that it is wrong

3rd August 2012, 02:33 AM	#53
theprestige Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 8,888	Originally Posted by Corsair 115 AlBell appears to be the one implying it is a handout. Really? I don't see him implying anything of the kind. Can you point out exactly where he appears to do so? Quote: At least, he did not respond directly to my question on that point. Well, to be fair, it's kind of a stupid question. It kind of looks like you're more interested in playing silly buggers over an imaginary difference of opinion, than in having a serious discussion. So it's understandable if he prefers to ignore the question rather than answer it. Quote: My position on the matter would be the same as yours. And as far as I can tell, there's no evidence it's any different from Al's position. Do you have any reason to believe that AlBell can't tell the difference between a handout and a job? If not, why ask the question?
theprestige Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 8,888

3rd August 2012, 05:29 AM	#54
mhaze Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Woo*(+-1.10)^20=AGWwoo Posts: 15,400	Originally Posted by tyr_13 That doesn't address anything I said. Point out what I 'made up'. ..... No, I admit that. I didn't address the nonsense about "politics are getting worse" because it was clearly just a statement by another to the effect that "elections are not going for my candidate". I don't think people move because of politics of one sort or another, in most cases. They may move because of the EFFECTS of those such as more or fewer jobs or opportunities, more or less of a pro-business attitude, more or less taxes, presence or absence of state taxes. A lot of the people moving to Texas are bent to the liberal side politically. But just give us some time, we'll educatify them.
	__________________ Get your climate widget Climategate - History's Biggest Scam Poptech's List Climate Acronyms

3rd August 2012, 07:25 AM	#55
Stellafane Village Idiot. Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Green Mountains Posts: 6,322	Texas is about to elect a Tea Party senator? No sweat -- my state has a socialist senator; the two of them will just cancel each other out. You're welcome.
	__________________ Another Shameless Googlebomb Plug for www.stopsylvia.com

3rd August 2012, 07:39 AM	#56
cwalner Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Deepest Darkest Indiana Posts: 5,754	Originally Posted by Ziggurat I never claimed it was. But it's not keeping people away, and it's not driving them out. We don't really know that. We just know that whatever effect it has is minor and is overshadowed by other drivers. It could very well be that the growth would be greater if Texas wasn't so supportive of Tea Party ideals (and also possible that it would be lesser). That is the great challenge with social science - isolating the variables to truly test a hypothesis. As an example, I can take myself personally. While I do not really like what I hear about the politics of Texas, that is not what is preventing me from moving to Houston. I would not want to live anywhere on the gulf coast because it it is just too damn humid for my tastes (I can barely stand the humidity here in Indiana). Yet all that being said, if I could earn significantly more there than I could here, I would still consider it. However, I would also take a pay cut to move back to Nevada or California, some nice, dry states
	__________________ Vecini - Inconceivable! Inigo - You keep on using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

3rd August 2012, 07:48 AM	#57
Ziggurat Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 26,285	Originally Posted by cwalner We don't really know that. We just know that whatever effect it has is minor and is overshadowed by other drivers. I'll accept that, but it's close enough for my purposes.
	__________________ "As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law

3rd August 2012, 11:58 AM	#58
Corsair 115 Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Tranquility Base Posts: 8,675	Originally Posted by theprestige Really? I don't see him implying anything of the kind. Can you point out exactly where he appears to do so? Well, I did, hence my question, asked for clarification so as to get a better handle on this view. That is sort of the point of a dialogue, isn't it, when there are perhaps differences or uncertainties on certain items? Originally Posted by theprestige Well, to be fair, it's kind of a stupid question. It kind of looks like you're more interested in playing silly buggers over an imaginary difference of opinion, than in having a serious discussion. AlBell's the one who brought up the idea of jobs over handouts. It is not reasonable to ask exactly what that means? Hence my question, which provided an example of the government providing jobs. It's not my fault if the comment to which I responded was phrased in a way that seemed to me to be vague and imprecise.
	__________________ "We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things not because they are easy, but because they are hard. Because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our abilities and skills, because that challenge is one we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win."

3rd August 2012, 01:10 PM	#59
mhaze Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Woo*(+-1.10)^20=AGWwoo Posts: 15,400	Originally Posted by Stellafane Texas is about to elect a Tea Party senator? No sweat -- my state has a socialist senator; the two of them will just cancel each other out. You're welcome. Thanks. Is your socialist senator having fun watching all those UHauls driving out of his state?
	__________________ Get your climate widget Climategate - History's Biggest Scam Poptech's List Climate Acronyms

3rd August 2012, 01:21 PM	#60
NoahFence Psycho Kitty Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Patriot Nation Posts: 9,417	Quote: How bad could it get? Well, Texas is one of the few states where Sarah Palin could easily get elected. Don't give her any ideas....
	__________________ Our truest life is when we are in our dreams awake. -Henry David Thoreau

3rd August 2012, 02:49 PM	#61
Stellafane Village Idiot. Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Green Mountains Posts: 6,322	Originally Posted by mhaze Thanks. Is your socialist senator having fun watching all those UHauls driving out of his state? Hard to say; I think he's too busy reading his press clippings and telling everyone how great he is. And in any case, there's not a lot of UHauls around here these days, since most of the people have already left. (Although to be fair, Vermont's current unemployment rate is considerably lower than Texas's).
	__________________ Another Shameless Googlebomb Plug for www.stopsylvia.com

3rd August 2012, 03:36 PM	#62
AlBell Philosopher Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 5,567	Originally Posted by Biscuit ... ETA: I don't think the extreme teabagger politics of Texas is what is drawing new immigrants to settle there. True. It's the jobs and growing economy likely due to Texas tea party ideals in action. The oil business does make money and provide good paying jobs. That in turn leads to added economic growth.
AlBell Philosopher Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 5,567	__________________ "The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money." M. Thatcher, Economics: Share The Wealth. Obamanomics: Share The Pain. Important things in life–beauty, grace, redemption, compassion, loyalty, love–are beyond the reach of reason. Which doesn’t make them any less real.

3rd August 2012, 03:43 PM	#63
tyr_13 Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Falconer, NY Posts: 9,774	Originally Posted by theprestige Seems kind of strange to complain about appeals to worse problems, when the question at hand is what problem do people actually think is worse... ... Me? I prefer an hour with a full bladder to a minute with a kidney stone. Oh, wait--appeal to worse problems, a fallacy! Guess I should prefer the kidney stone instead. No, appeal to worse problems would be saying that you shouldn't talk about or criticize having a full bladder because you don't have a kidney stone. And as what you identify as the question at hand actually isn't then I'd say that the red herring has been pretty successful.
	__________________ Circled nothing is still nothing. "Nothing will stop the U.S. from being a world leader, not even a handful of adults who want their kids to take science lessons from a book that mentions unicorns six times." -UNLoVedRebel Mumpsimus: a stubborn person who insists on making an error in spite of being shown that it is wrong

3rd August 2012, 05:08 PM	#64
Tricky Briefly immortal Moderator Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: The Group W bench Posts: 42,403	This thread has taken an odd turn (which I hope will be split to its own thread) but my point in the OP was not that Texas is a horrible place. I've lived here more than half my life, and for the most part it has been pretty good. It has provided me constant employment and affordable living circumstances. But that doesn't mean I like the politics. Have those politics made the state successful? Well, it's hard to say. The low taxes have certainly attracted businesses, as have the lax enforcement of pollution laws and the "nod nod wink wink" attitude toward business that hire illegal immigrants. But I have a good job with an international company. For the poor, it is not as pretty a sight. Worst education, worst health care, and some of the worst poverty in the nation. If this is what it takes to be a "success" then, in my opinion, it's not worth it. Whether or not they can continue walking this thin line between success and disaster is yet to be seen, but I don't want to be represented by the Tea Party. I think they are one of the worst things ever to happen to this country.

3rd August 2012, 05:17 PM	#65
mhaze Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Woo*(+-1.10)^20=AGWwoo Posts: 15,400	Originally Posted by Tricky This thread has taken an odd turn (which I hope will be split to its own thread) but my point in the OP was not that Texas is a horrible place. I've lived here more than half my life, and for the most part it has been pretty good. It has provided me constant employment and affordable living circumstances. But that doesn't mean I like the politics. Have those politics made the state successful? ...... Good point. Now. Has politics made Chicago successful? BWHAHAHAAHAHA!
	__________________ Get your climate widget Climategate - History's Biggest Scam Poptech's List Climate Acronyms

3rd August 2012, 05:33 PM	#66
jj grumpy old skeptic Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Deep in the rain Posts: 18,711	Originally Posted by mhaze Good point. Now. Has politics made Chicago successful? BWHAHAHAAHAHA! I don't know, it looks pretty successful from most peoples' point of view. You are making fun of Chicago, I can tell, but now tell me, what do you know about Chicago? Have you lived there for 10 years? Can you explain why you think Chicago is unsuccessful? This is especially hard for you, I'm sure, because Chicago is quite successful. You may not like the mayor, but that's just part of the Republican "anything but Obama" campaign.
	__________________ The Power to Quit

3rd August 2012, 05:41 PM	#67
Ziggurat Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 26,285	Originally Posted by Tricky Worst education, worst health care, and some of the worst poverty in the nation That part is simply not true.
	__________________ "As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law

3rd August 2012, 07:04 PM	#68
Tricky Briefly immortal Moderator Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: The Group W bench Posts: 42,403	Originally Posted by Ziggurat That part is simply not true. All right. I retract that claim. They are not last in education, and by some measures they are doing pretty well, though mostly because of higher education, not so much lower grades. But I was wrong on that and I admit it.

3rd August 2012, 10:09 PM	#69
bpesta22 Cereal Killer Join Date: Jul 2001 Posts: 4,651	For the 50 US states, Texas ranks: 38 Global well-being 11 fundamentalist religious beliefs 5 Crime 24 Education 31.5 Health 41 income 30 IQ 4 inmates per capita http://www.people.vcu.edu/~mamcdani/...%282010%29.pdf
bpesta22 Cereal Killer Join Date: Jul 2001 Posts: 4,651	__________________ Manifest thy bosoms or decamp.

4th August 2012, 07:43 PM	#70
balrog666 Eigenmode: Cynic Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,545	Originally Posted by bpesta22 For the 50 US states, Texas ranks: 38 Global well-being 11 fundamentalist religious beliefs 5 Crime 24 Education 31.5 Health 41 income 30 IQ 4 inmates per capita http://www.people.vcu.edu/~mamcdani/...%282010%29.pdf Well, gosh, however could they be beating Kalifornia by 40-to-1 then?
	__________________ A person who won't think has no advantage over one who can't think. - (paraphrased) Mark Twain Diversity--When all colors and creeds believe exactly as liberals want them to. Or Else! -Coyote

4th August 2012, 10:31 PM	#71
mhaze Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Woo*(+-1.10)^20=AGWwoo Posts: 15,400	It's just all those darned folks in their UHails moving down here dragging our scores down.
	__________________ Get your climate widget Climategate - History's Biggest Scam Poptech's List Climate Acronyms

4th August 2012, 10:38 PM	#72
tyr_13 Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Falconer, NY Posts: 9,774	Originally Posted by balrog666 Well, gosh, however could they be beating Kalifornia by 40-to-1 then? 40 to 1 in what?
	__________________ Circled nothing is still nothing. "Nothing will stop the U.S. from being a world leader, not even a handful of adults who want their kids to take science lessons from a book that mentions unicorns six times." -UNLoVedRebel Mumpsimus: a stubborn person who insists on making an error in spite of being shown that it is wrong

4th August 2012, 10:42 PM	#73
Tricky Briefly immortal Moderator Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: The Group W bench Posts: 42,403	Originally Posted by tyr_13 40 to 1 in what? Faux cowboys.

4th August 2012, 11:17 PM	#74
UnrepentantSinner A post by Alan Smithee Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: USAian is not a word Posts: 26,438	I saw a little blub on the local news crawl that while Dewhurst had most of his funding from within the state, most of Cruz's came from external sources. Thank you Citizens United.
	__________________ I am an American citizen who is part of American society and briefly served in the American armed forces. I use American dollars and pay taxes that support the American government. And yes, despite the editorial decison to change American politics to the nonsensical "USA politics" subforum, I follow and comment on American politics.

4th August 2012, 11:26 PM	#75
Ziggurat Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 26,285	Originally Posted by UnrepentantSinner I saw a little blub on the local news crawl that while Dewhurst had most of his funding from within the state, most of Cruz's came from external sources. Thank you Citizens United. Citizens United had zero effect on campaign contributions, because the case had nothing to do with campaign contributions. It has no bearing on the subject you refer to,
	__________________ "As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law