Depends on the republican. Most of them are garbage RINOs but the entire democratic party has been hijacked by communists. It is still the lesser of two evils.
Hi Miquel! I see you got banned again. It's ironic that your new username is making fun of Js even though you promote their choice political philosophy.
I live in (or around) two of the big income inequality cities and they are both heavily democratic. I would be doing way better in another city and am actually close to accepting a new job in the south in the near future. The pay would be a little less but the cost of living will decline by about 50%. According to you I would be better off taking a higher salary in say NYC an paying 300% more though. LOL!
I make more from my trading portfolio than my salary so I would be doing better under GWB than Barry simply because of the Bush tax cuts. There goes your theory on that one.
I have posted stats under Barry regarding income inequality. Barry's base of blacks, hispanics, millenials and single women have seen their incomes decrease by 10-20% under his two terms. In fact, I would say everyone is doing worse under Barry besides those that are able to take advantage of your liberal QE program. The fact is that income inequality is at its highest in over a century under BARRY due to his socialist policies but keep drinking the kool-aid. Lord knows, you're incapable of any independent thought, instead choosing to promote the liberal garbage you were indoctrinated in due to the s***ty US public education system.
The same pattern can be seen in the other six cities Brookings listed as having the highest level of income inequality in the U.S.:
District of Columbia: Obama got 267,070 votes (91 percent) compared to 21,381 votes (7 percent) for Romney;
New York City: 81 percent of Big Apple voters pulled the lever for Obama;
Alameda County, Calif: (which includes Oakland): 78.7 percent for Obama;
Chicago: Obama got 853,102 votes compared to Romney’s 148,181;
Los Angeles County: Obama carried it with 69.7 percent of the vote.
City of Baltimore: 87.4 percent of the votes cast were for Obama, while Romney received only 11.1 percent.
A majority of voters in only four major U.S. cities chose Republican challenger Mitt Romney over Obama, according to The Atlantic, and all four were near the bottom of the income inequality list: Phoenix (38th out of 50 cities in income inequality), Oklahoma City (41st), Fort Worth (44th) and Salt Lake City (not listed in the top 50).
“The big cities with the highest 95/20 ratios in 2012 were Atlanta, San Francisco, Miami and Boston” – where a household with an income in the top 95th percentile earned 15 percent more than a household in the bottom 20th percentile.
They were followed by Washington, D.C., New York, Oakland, Chicago, Los Angeles and Baltimore, all of which had a 95/20 ratio exceeding 12 – compared to 9.1 nationwide.
And, it turns out, the cities with the highest levels of income equality also happen to be the same places were Obama won some of his biggest victories in 2012.
“In 2012, Obama won 69.4 percent of the vote in cities with more than 500,000 people and 58.4% of the vote in cities with 50,000 to 500,000 people,” UrbanCincy reported. The final popular vote total across the nation was a lot closer: 51 percent for Obama, and 47 percent for Romney.
Atlanta, which Brookings says has the nation’s highest level of income inequality, is the ninth largest metropolitan area in the U.S. The City of Atlanta straddles two counties, and both went for Obama in a big way in 2012. Obama beat Romney in Fulton County 64.1 to 34.4 percent, and pulled in 77.6 percent of the vote in DeKalb County compared to Romney’s 20.9 percent.
The president’s victory was even more lopsided in the City and County of San Francisco, where Obama walked away with a landslide 83.4 percent of the vote compared to Romney’s 13.0 percent.
Obama also easily won Florida’s Miami-Dade County, which includes the City of Miami, walking away with 61.5 percent of the vote compared to Romney’s 37.8 percent. Same thing in Boston, which Obama handily won 79 to 19 percent, with Romney carrying only two of the city’s 253 precincts – and one of them by just four votes.
March 5, 2014 - 3:19 PM
By Barbara Hollingsworth
President Obama has characterized income inequality as “the defining challenge of our time,” prodding Republicans to come up with “concrete plans” to reduce it.
However, a new study by the Brookings Institute shows that the highest levels of income inequality in the U.S. are found in Democratic strongholds: the nation’s largest cities.
In his Dec. 4, 2013 speech, “Remarks on Economic Mobility,” Obama praised the New Deal and the War on Poverty for building “the largest middle class the world has ever known,” and lamented “a dangerous and growing inequality and lack of upward mobility that has jeopardized middle-class America’s basic bargain – that if you work hard, you have a chance to get ahead.”
The president challenged congressional Republicans to come up with “concrete plans that will actually reduce inequality, build the middle class, provide more ladders of opportunity to the poor.”
But the highest levels of income inequality in the nation are in cities that voted overwhelmingly to reelect Obama in 2012.
“Inequality in big cities exceeds the national average,” according to the study by Brookings senior fellow Alan Berube, entitled “All Cities Are Not Created Equal.”
Berube used data from the Census Bureau’s 2012 American Community Survey to calculate the “95/20 ratio” - dividing the number of households with incomes in the top 95 percent by the number of households in the bottom 20 percent.
Using this methodology, he found that the difference between the highest earners and lowest earners was greater in the nation’s 50 largest cities than in the United States as a whole.
“However, some cities are much more unequal than others,” Berube noted.
If you prefer the former, you're a dumb liberal commie. Also, how ironic is it that you smear religion yet OBSESS over marriage, which is inherently a religious institution.
The bears will get their days soon. Until then, she's a bull until she ain't.
Putin was in the KGB. He could probably kill Barry in one strike.
I would say six seconds.
And Pud will still deny op-ex Friday pegs.
We won't stay a democracy if things continue the way we are. We are not a democracy anyway. When the majority of people are against things like gay marriage and Barrycare and the government shoves this #$%$ down our throats anyway then you're not living in a democracy.
Option writers win again. Shorting a couple DUST 20 weeklies for .25 each on this mini spike. Looking for a peg around 20.
If the liberals keep enslaving their own base via entitlements, then it might not matter. Entitlement dependence is the equivalent of debt bondage (i.e. indentured servitude/slavery).
You would think after the war on poverty began 50 years ago that the left would see that such programs AREN'T WORKING. Poverty is higher than when the war on poverty started but no liberal seems to care. Liberals only measure success by their #$%$ intentions.
Religion definitely has to do with it. Obviously, it's just one factor. It's really just a matter of turning the country more liberal over the years. There are a lot of subfactors related to that such as the media, music (particularly rap), women's empowerment (I'm not saying we should turn back the clock on stuff like this but you'd have to be naïve to think it hasn't had an affect on how relationships are structured), the internet and the amount of porn sites and affair sites, the economy, etc.
My dad was born in 1950 and used to tell me stories about growing up with his grandfather (WW2 vet and basically your typical American man from those days) and it is a lot different today. People don't trust each other as much, there is lack of discipline in families and schools, etc. Race has to do with it as well although liberals will deny it despite the statistics. EVERY person I know that has been in a interracial relationship and had a kid is now single. EVERY SINGLE ONE. I think that has to do with different cultures more than anything but it has to be enormously difficult being a mixed kid in America.
This is what happens when you live in a multi-cultural nation full of liberal ideals. Barry would rather promote homosexuality rather than traditional family, religious and moral values that would reduce the number of births out of wedlock.