• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Would You Support A National Divorce?

This is a different map but ultimately says the same thing:

With respect:

Yes, thanks. I searched and found your original map, which had a link to their source, which was a broken link. This gives slightly more information: the pockets are metropolitan areas.

Yes and no. A country of sufficient size will never have all regions who are economically equivalent because not all territory is equal.

Not equal and very unequal are two very different things.

Yes, locations of international trade are bound to be wealthier than regions with limited to no natural resources.

I plan to start a thread on neoliberalism that includes this map.
 
With respect:

Yes, thanks. I searched and found your original map, which had a link to their source, which was a broken link. This gives slightly more information: the pockets are metropolitan areas.

I figured that was a given.


Not equal and very unequal are two very different things.

Very unequal is, by definition, under the umbrella of not equal.

Land not being equal is the inevitable result of different patches of land containing different resources.

I plan to start a thread on neoliberalism that includes this map.

You can't really lay the blame for ports being economic hubs as the product of neoliberalism. That's been a fact of life since we invented ports.
 
Oh yes, taxing the rich and large companies, what a stupid idea.

What was I thinking?

Much better to just let billionaires put billions in bank accounts instead and let companies do stock buybacks so the rich get even richer as they're the main stockholders.
You really have been fully brainwashed into the trickle down fantasy.
Billionaires put money in banks, and banks lend that money to the average Joe to buy a house, a car or say start a business.
 
Billionaires put money in banks, and banks lend that money to the average Joe to buy a house, a car or say start a business.

Billionaires are a tiny fraction of any banks business.
They would still have money to lend if the world decided to tax all of them 90% of all their money tomorrow.
 
You can't really lay the blame for ports being economic hubs as the product of neoliberalism. That's been a fact of life since we invented ports.

With respect:

I wish there were more information on what accounts for the majority of economic activities in those metropolitan areas. Those areas being metropolitan is more important than some of them having ports.

You've incorrectly guessed what I'm going to post about regarding that map and neoliberalism.
 
With respect:

I wish there were more information on what accounts for the majority of economic activities in those metropolitan areas. Those areas being metropolitan is more important than some of them having ports.

They're epicenters of our economy; trade, finance, services, and manufacturing.
 
Billionaires are a tiny fraction of any banks business.
They would still have money to lend if the world decided to tax all of them 90% of all their money tomorrow.
What would the world do with that money? After all Putin is by far the richest person on the planet
 
They're epicenters of our economy; trade, finance, services, and manufacturing.

With respect:

Would you like to offer your interpretation of the original GDP map that you posted? As in, what are your comments on what the map shows? As in, does it show that 'blue states' support 'red states,' as it appears others interpreted it as showing?
 
With respect:

Would you like to offer your interpretation of the original GDP map that you posted? As in, what are your comments on what the map shows?

The economic reality that our states are not equivalent in their productivity.

This isn't new or unique to the United States either.
 
What would the world do with that money? After all Putin is by far the richest person on the planet

Governments could use the money to help their people.
I see no problem with that
 
The economic reality that our states are not equivalent in their productivity.

This isn't new or unique to the United States either.

With respect:

Of course, because capitalism and neoliberalism aim for and thrive on inequalities.
 
With respect:

Of course, because capitalism and neoliberalism aim for and thrive on inequalities.

Regions not having economic equality predates both capitalism and neoliberalism.
 
Separating would be a disaster for Red America. They would instantly become third world.

2/3 ofAmerica's GDP comes from democratic (blue) counties.

 
Regions not having economic equality predates both capitalism and neoliberalism.

With respect:

A lot of people are using the line "this predates that." So what? What does that really mean? You're trying to dismiss the effects of current socioeconomics by saying that there have always been socioeconomics.
 
With respect:

A lot of people are using the line "this predates that." So what? What does that really mean? You're trying to dismiss the effects of current socioeconomics by saying that there have always been socioeconomics.

Well no, my point is that economic inequality of territory is inevitable because different lands don't carry the same value for a variety of reasons. Are you seeking a deeper explanation of why land is valued differently?
 
Well no, my point is that economic inequality of territory is inevitable because different lands don't carry the same value for a variety of reasons. Are you seeking a deeper explanation of why land is valued differently?

With respect:

No. Maybe I'll tag you if and when I post that thread on neoliberalism.
 
T
Separating would be a disaster for Red America. They would instantly become third world.

2/3 ofAmerica's GDP comes from democratic (blue) counties.

Texas has the second largest economy besides California and the liberals would just flee the blue states after they destroy them all, like normal.
 
T

Texas has the second largest economy besides California and the liberals would just flee the blue states after they destroy them all, like normal.
2/3 of US GDP is from democratic counties.
 
Buying votes?

The cynicism is clear here.
They could use the money on infrastructure or other large projects that people will use.
 
The cynicism is clear here.
They could use the money on infrastructure or other large projects that people will use.

Oh course it is, I prefer rich private citizens, rather then rich politicians. My hatred of government incompetence goes back to the 60s when they were building the Illinois toll roads. I read when they were planing them they would be toll free once paid off
That of course never happened and in the 1980s the toll way was caught having gold plated fixtures in the employees bathrooms.
Fast forward to Obamas shovel ready jobs, all I seen at the time driving around was these cute signs saying Obama did this or that, and really swell nice trees and and fancy street lamps
All the money spent on the USA War on poverty since the 1960s , I see no results today, All I read about is a homeless epidemic getting larger and larger.

i don't read about or see multi million new drug and alcohol rehabs being built for people to get help for free or a minimal cost.

I don't read about multi millions being spent for homeless centers and housing. Only private charities/with some government assistance.

All I read about is rich public employees and politicians.

The only thing I see is my bang for the buck is the US military

Do you get now why I am cynical?
 
Back
Top Bottom