Red State vs Blue State -- drawing battlelines?

quote:

---

Under Trump, red states are finally going to be able to turn themselves into poor, unhealthy paradises

​

In 2004, the journalist and historian Thomas Frank wrote an insightful and prescient book, What’s the Matter With Kansas?", in which he tried to puzzle out why voters in his native state backed Republicans whose policies undermined their own economic interests.

​

Watching the apocalyptic response to Donald Trump's victory in the liberal precincts I inhabit, I’m struck by a similar quandary: Why are voters in states that pay a disproportionately large share of federal taxes, and benefit from a disproportionately small share of federal spending, so upset about the prospect of a cut in taxes and federal spending?

​

Data compiled by the Pew Charitable Trust found that 10 states that receive less than a dollar back for every dollar they send to Washington: Delaware, Minnesota, Nebraska, New Jersey, Connecticut, Illinois, Ohio, Massachusetts, New York and Rhode Island. And here are the states that get more than $2 back for every $1 in taxes paid: Mississippi, New Mexico, West Virginia, Hawaii, South Carolina, Alabama, Maine, Montana, Alaska, Virginia, Arizona, Idaho, Kentucky and Vermont. You don’t have to be a political scientist to see the blue state/red state pattern here. Red state voters may talk a good game about small government and low taxes, but in reality they are socialist moochers.

​

Rather than wallowing in the hypocrisy of all this, however, Democrats should see the opportunity here an opportunity to turn the Republican program to their selfish advantage and create the kind of society where people look out for each other and business interests are not allowed to run roughshod over workers and consumers.

​

If these states want to maintain the Obamacare insurance exchanges, the low-income subsidies and the expansion of the Medicaid program, they can do that, just as Massachusetts did under Mitt Romney even before passage of the federal law. Their state insurance commissioners can also keep in place many of the Obamacare insurance regulations.

​

The additional state revenue could also be used to replace cuts in federal funding for public schools, or food stamps, or public transit subsidies. Given the existing imbalance between taxes paid and benefits received by most of these states, there should even be money left over to invest in public college and university systems that in recent years have suffered badly from a reduction in state support.

---

Curiously, I have felt for some time that the New England states with democrat control could form an alliance to provide a progressive agenda supported by state taxes, including universal health insurance, tuition free community college, and minimum living wage, mandatory overtime and family leave, etc. etc. (see About WFP - Working Families Party).This would work by letting republicans cut taxes and programs so that they don't keep providing those disproportionately for the red states, and using that money saved for state\alliance programs.They could also provide state banks that are credit unions and that provide offices in low income areas, allowing debit cards to be used for payday cashing.Let the red state GOP controlled states turn themselves into 3rd world states, just not on my dime ... if you know what I mean ...EnjoyEdited by RAZD, : revised entirely to new postEdited by RAZD, : .Edited by RAZD, : ..

This could also spread state-by-state the way LGBT marriage and marijuana legalization is spreading.The alliance could work by ensuring reciprocity between the member states and common laws in each state (much like the ALEC laws, just with a progressive agenda instead of the repressive republican one).Don't complain -- lead.Enjoy

.The range extends from social democracy ...

quote:

---

Social democracy is a political, social and economic ideology that supports economic and social interventions to promote social justice within the framework of a capitalist economy; and a policy regime involving collective bargaining arrangements, a commitment to representative democracy, measures for income redistribution, regulation of the economy in the general interest and welfare state provisions.[1][2][3] Social democracy thus aims to create the conditions for capitalism to lead to greater democratic, egalitarian and solidaristic outcomes; and is often associated with the set of socioeconomic policies that became prominent in Northern and Western Europeparticularly the Nordic model in the Nordic countriesduring the latter half of the 20th century.[4][5]

---

(Which is what Bernie was advocating (universal healthcare, tuition free college, living minimum wage, etc) and it also applies to what FDR did.)... to Democratic socialism

quote:

---

Democratic socialism is a political ideology that advocates political democracy alongside social ownership of the means of production, often with an emphasis on democratic management of enterprises within a socialist economic system. The term "democratic socialism" is sometimes used synonymously with "socialism"; the adjective "democratic" is often added to distinguish it from the Marxist—Leninist brand of socialism, which is widely viewed as being non-democratic in practice.[1] "Democratic socialism" is also sometimes used as a synonym for social democracy, although many say this is misleading as democratic socialism advocates social ownership of the means of production, whereas social democracy does not.[2]

---

and even here "social ownership" is not necessarily "the state" as it could be worker owned cooperatives run democratically by the workers, the key being the type of "socialist economic system" being used:

quote:

---

Socialism (economic system)

​

Socialism is a social and economic system characterised by social ownership and democratic control of the means of production.[1][2][3][4][5][6] "Social ownership" may refer to public ownership, cooperative ownership, citizen ownership of equity, or any combination of these.[7] Although there are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them,[8] social ownership is the common element shared by its various forms.[5][9][10]

​

Socialism can be divided into both non-market and market forms.[11] Non-market socialism involves the substitution of factor markets, money and financial decisions for managing the economy with engineering and technical criteria centered around calculation performed in-kind, thereby functioning according to different economic laws than those of capitalism with an economic mechanism that circumvents the inefficiencies and crises traditionally associated with capital accumulation and the profit system.[12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19] By contrast, market socialism retains the use of monetary prices, factor markets, and, in some cases, the profit motive with respect to the operation of socially-owned enterprises and the allocation of capital goods between them, with the profits accruing to society at large in the form of a social dividend or directly to the workers of each firm.[20][21][22] The feasibility and exact methods of resource allocation and calculation for a socialist system are the subjects of the socialist calculation debate.

---

So we can have socialist market democracy within each blue state without taking over the means of production by the states, merely by advancing the use of worker coops run democratically by the workers within a capitalist framework, and by having social safety nets, from guaranteed living wage to universal healthcare, plus programs designed to enhance peoples lives, like free local (community) college and trade schools and affordable housing and daycare. (see Minnesota)While red states would be free to pursue pure market driven economy and capitalist concentration of wealth at the top with no safety nets for the working poor, the elimination of the middle class and everyone for themselves. (see Wisconsin) Indeed. There is a lot of support for universal healthcare and for a living minimum wage across the political lines, as there is for rational gun restrictions and a tax system that does not favor the rich.Enjoy

Hi Faith, I'm going to ask you to keep your political comments to The 2016 United States Presidential Election thread, where you are already doing overtime, so we can focus here on what people would see as positive changes in red states and what people would see as positive changes in blue states.Yes I'm picking on you, sorry, but that is because you are most likely to hijack this thread with continual off topic comments.This is the split we already have, one we can work with to compare ideology and results. For instance we can already compare Wisconsin and Minnesota for overall performance on economy and public health and happiness.Let me start:Red State wish list:

1. No government healthcare of any kind - use private for-profit insurance
2. No public schools, all education via private or religious schools or home-schooled, curriculum decided by school not state
3. No social safety net programs, no social security, no unemployment, no welfare, no disability assistance, no housing assistance
4. No "intrusive" government programs, no EPA, no ADA, no OSHA, etc
5. Public works constructed by prison labor
6. All protesters and dissenters put in prison
7. No public lands
8. No indian reservations, no special treatment
9. No unions, no right to organize or protest
10. No abortions, no women's rights
11. No gay marriage, no gay rights
12. No anti-discrimination laws
13. Stand your ground laws (= legalized murders)
14. Right to work laws (= workers have no rights)
15. Restrictions to prevent illegal voting
16. Restriction on immigration
17. No restrictions on businesses
18. Sales tax instead of income tax

This is my opinion, of course, based on what I see republicans saying, so feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.I notice that this list is predominantly negative, but that is because I have not personally seen any positive suggestions from republicans for years.Blue State wish list:

1. Universal healthcare, including free birth control and provision for abortions
2. Free public funded school through state community college (associates degree) or Trade School to learn a skilled trade, emphasizing scientific evidence based approaches
3. Guaranteed living income, replacing social security, welfare, unemployment etc, and that covers cost of housing, utilities and food.
4. Rights to unionize, for associations strengthened
5. All citizens free to vote without restrictions, using recountable paper ballots and ranked voting, all elections automatically audited to ensure proper counting of votes as cast
6. No gerrymandering, so each vote has equal power
7. Strengthen EPA, ADA, OSHA, etc
8. Prisons shut down by providing education and health care, treating drug use as a health problem and providing a path to work
9. Path to citizenship for all immigrants and expanded immigration
10. Rights of people over corporations
11. Make indian reservations sovereign and independently run
12. Simplified tax laws that close loopholes and shift burden to those who benefit most from the economy, no more tax assistance to red states
13. Reasonable gun laws that restrict ownership of mass killing guns and ammunition systems and close purchasing loopholes
14. Reduction of militarization of police and security

And these are my wish list points, ones that I have seen espoused by different progressive leaders.Enjoy

Let's return to the issue of red vs blue statesanything not related to this is off topic, and I will complain to admin to shut the thread.Most of these comments are more appropriate on the The 2016 United States Presidential Election threadEnjoyEdited by RAZD, : .