your link pretty much confirmed what I linked to.
I didn't say that it contradicted it, but rather that it was more complete. Still nothing about controlling for factors other than income.
>>a nice diversion from you.
Pfft. Diversion my ass. Get the NORC study if you want to use the results, not a slanted perspective from some RW lunatic.
>>the poor spend money on television, on smoking and on alcohol.
You mean
watch more television. And again, where's the study? Where are the controls for other variables?
Poverty is related to poor education. I figure that goes a long way to explaining higher rates of smoking. I'll agree that the money is wasted and that's a problem when ya don't have much. Fwiw, the data you put up on smoking ended in 1993, but I'm guessing low-income types are still more likely to consume nicotine and other deadly poisons. And they're perhaps more likely to abuse alcohol.
My view is that scolding them to take better care of their health won't be as successful as efforts to improve their educational and employment opportunities. Are GOP governors denying them access to health insurance and thus healthcare that might ameliorate some of this?
>>that's just three easy examples of how they can save.
Two. Watching TV doesn't cost money, it just takes you away from more profitable activities, right? Unless yer watching
Shark Tank.
>>So at the end of the day.. Moderate Right.. as a point.
He wants to rag on people living in poverty. He demands that they be noble, upright, self-disciplined go-getters. Otoh, I figure they're like everybody else when it comes to admirable behaviour. Some get it done and some don't. Many are in the middle. I'd say I'm one of those myself.
What do you mean, "my side"?
I missed that post. Yer not as easily "classified" as many here. John didn't mean anything negative. This battle has become a sort of grudge match in some ways. I welcome yer input if only as a fresh voice that will offer reasoned arguments. Don't take the angry sniping in this section too seriously. It's foolish, but it doesn't mean anything.
I'll bet you have never looked at a budget let alone the federal budget.
Did ya build yer successful business career on moronic judgements like that?
what could possibly stimulate demand like the supply of great new invention say a cure for cancer or an autonomous auto?
Plows?
Geithner recycled the money and that is easy to find
You've repeated this lie many times. You never even try to back it up. You can't. This is why you Ignore or at least pretend to Ignore my posts.
>>something called saved jobs that no one captures
Just more of the tired BS you keep repeating. Jobs are jobs, and we've added fifteen million full-time, private-sector
jobs since Dec 2009.
Another reading assignment from a RW moron with no excerpted material.
Btw, if anyone else has a problem with the subscribe pop-up on that page, just reload and quickly stop. Should do it.