Wake Up Republicans: Latinos Now Outnumber Whites In California
Time to get with the program and address issues beyond those important to old, rich white men.
Census Bureau data show that as of July 1, 2014, about 14.99 million Latinos live in California, edging out the 14.92 million whites in the state…
The demographers agreed: at some point in 2014, Latinos would pass whites as the largest ethnic group in California.
Determining when exactly that milestone would occur was more of a tricky question. Counting people isn’t like counting movie ticket receipts.
The official confirmation had to wait until new population figures were released by the Census Bureau this summer. The new tally, released in late June, shows that as of July 1, 2014, about 14.99 million Latinos live in California, edging out the 14.92 million whites in the state.
Copyright 2015 Liberaland
145 responses to Wake Up Republicans: Latinos Now Outnumber Whites In California
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
tracey marie July 8th, 2015 at 14:17
Get ready cons, Texas has >40% hispanics as well. All minorities are growing, get used to it, you are just afraid that you will be treated as bad as you treat all minorities.
Larry Schmitt July 8th, 2015 at 16:42
Exactly. If you treat people well, it doesn’t matter what group you belong to, or whether you are part of the minority or majority. I have nothing to worry about. I treat everyone like a human being, and expect the same in return.
Carla Akins July 8th, 2015 at 18:42
And they are becoming more engaged, more involved in their communities and more vocal. There’s comfort in numbers and the Latino culture is actually family driven, this is a group of folks that truly care for extended family. My soon to be son in law is from Mexico, his family is very liberal (and atheist) but even as demographic the single commonality with Republicans is religion. I don’t see that being enough.
tracey marie July 8th, 2015 at 19:25
Hispanics have ears and eyes and see what the right says and does to them. The gop is toast unless they truley drop their racism and bigotry.
Tim Coolio July 8th, 2015 at 18:58
When Texas turns blue the GOP will be locked out of the oval office.
TuMadre, Ph.D July 8th, 2015 at 21:24
Oh, I’m ready for it. Been ready for it for a while.
tracey marie July 8th, 2015 at 21:26
you are wallowing in a pit of hate and stupidity
TuMadre, Ph.D July 8th, 2015 at 21:33
Not hate or stupidity. I’m just looking at the system, and maximizing my benefits. The government can only tax my wages, not my time or happiness.
tracey marie July 8th, 2015 at 21:39
your bisexual wife must be embarrassed because of your hate and phobia
TuMadre, Ph.D July 8th, 2015 at 21:42
What hate? Understanding the rules, and manipulating them for maximum benefit isn’t hate.
Also, what’s with the focus on my wife being attracted to both men and women? It’s largely irrelevant to the conversation at hand. Is it an attempt to shame me? If I was ashamed of that, I never would have mentioned it.
tracey marie July 8th, 2015 at 21:50
Nope, you attack others while ypou have a bi sexual wife.
TuMadre, Ph.D July 8th, 2015 at 21:52
I haven’t made a single attack in this thread. You, on the other hand, seem to be trying to attack me by pointing out the fact that my wife is bisexual. Are you some sort of bigot, or are bisexuals only cool to you so long as they line up to your views?
tracey marie July 8th, 2015 at 21:55
stop whining you little puss
TuMadre, Ph.D July 8th, 2015 at 22:01
“Nope, you attack others while ypou have a bi sexual wife.”
“Stop whining you little puss”
Yeah. I’m the one attacking.
Suzanne McFly July 8th, 2015 at 15:16
I don’t feel this is an apt description….”old, rich white men”, it is more like “old white men who feel they would be rich if it weren’t for women, minorities, and culture”.
allison1050 July 8th, 2015 at 16:04
Yesssssssssss!
causeican July 8th, 2015 at 17:38
Headline – Mexicans taking back California.
Tim Coolio July 8th, 2015 at 22:37
Nope, white people will still be in charge m
Scott Tidwell July 8th, 2015 at 23:16
lol wtf HA
TuMadre, Ph.D July 8th, 2015 at 23:12
Taking a look at Mexico (which is also a democracy), it makes me wonder if California will be another Detroit in a few decades. Only time will tell.
greenfloyd July 9th, 2015 at 00:31
No way dude! Cali is a state, a very big state almost its own country already. It is alive and full of beautiful people, including many Mexicans, who would never allow such a thing. Remember Mexicans are dying to get out of Mexico, literally!
TuMadre, Ph.D July 9th, 2015 at 00:42
There is no denying that. The question isn’t whether they like America. The question is whether the majority of them understand WHY America’s economy does better than Mexico’s. Part of the reason is because of the difference in corruption levels, as well as fiscal policy.
greenfloyd July 9th, 2015 at 01:25
At one point I would have agreed about “corruption levels,” however these days I’m not so sure there isn’t just as much corruption on the US side as the Mexican side.
Most Americans and Mexicans are in the same boat; 1% of pop controls 90% of economy. Mexicans get it! That’s why so many of them want to get out of Mexico. Although I also understand there is a substantial number of Mexicans and Central Americans who come and go to the US to engage in what I call international “Gangsta-culture,” Gc. This element of so-called “immigration problem,” is very problematic.
TuMadre, Ph.D July 9th, 2015 at 01:37
Part of that problem is that illegals aren’t able to get respectable jobs, so the parents have to work too many hours for too little pay, leaving the children without a sitter (not because they don’t care; they just can’t afford it). Thus, young adults do what young adults think is cool, even if it is stupid in the long run.
It’s unfortunate, but mostly unavoidable so long as parents cross the border illegally.
greenfloyd July 9th, 2015 at 02:29
I am not sure what you mean by “illegals?”
I suspect you mean the so-called “Dreamers,” whose parents brought them to the US and have now grown-up and want to get on the “Path to citizenship?” I am all for it! This element of the “immigration problem” isn’t a threat to public safety or national sovereignty. Mrs. Clinton makes a strong case for this group and of course wants their vote, eventually. However there is that Gc element in the mix, constantly moving over the border, today heading North with drugs, tomorrow heading South to get paid and pick-up a new load. This element certainly is a threat to public safety and national sovereignty.
I am for open borders with both Canada and Mexico. I want all Canadian, US and Mexican citizens to have multi-nationality status. This biggest obstacle to progressive fantasies like mine is re-distribution of both wealth and power.
TuMadre, Ph.D July 9th, 2015 at 02:36
By “illegals,” I mean the adults/young adults (children that know better)that crossed the border illegally, and knew what they were doing was illegal.
I have no problem with the children of illegals (whether foreign born or not) becoming American citizens. I have no issue with children being born out of country taking the path to citizenship, and I do not object to children born in the country being granted citizenship, even if their parents came over illegally.
But when parents come over and have to work 16 hour days to make ends meet, it leaves very little time for parenting, and that’s why their children join gangs (in an extraordinarily simple explanation). It’s a no-win scenario for the children, however, as they would likely face the same conditions south of the border.
greenfloyd July 9th, 2015 at 02:54
I may be wrong, however, I don’t think very many children from the group you describe as “illegals” are involved in Gc. You need to get down to the fundamental question, “Why do people move over borders?” And when it’s discovered they are actually fleeing failed states on our doorstep… it’s time to reevaluate our options and take action and save those states.
TuMadre, Ph.D July 9th, 2015 at 02:59
What options do we have, shy of taking away a people’s sovereignty?
greenfloyd July 9th, 2015 at 03:31
The first option is always diplomacy. Our leaders talk to their leaders…blah blah blah. The relationship with Mexico today seems moribund when it comes to anything except trade, of the legal sort.
Put tariffs and economic sanctions on the table with Mexico, etc., demand better distribution of wealth and freedom for labor to organize and benefit poor and middle-class Mexicans.
Considering the situation in Mexico with large parts of the country under the control of large well armed cartels and militias who daily cross our borders with ill-intent. So, I would also put a sword on the table. Then quietly leave the room. Let them figure out what needs to be done, with the understand if they don’t, we’ll do it for them!
TuMadre, Ph.D July 9th, 2015 at 03:38
To my knowledge, we are on speaking terms with Mexico. Hasn’t helped. Mexico has entered the Free Trade Agreement. If the US tries to place tariffs sanctions on a FTA member, we will find tariffs or sanctions against the US from all other countries. So that’s out.
Of course, I’m not much of a fan of the FTA, as we’ve been bleeding jobs for decades. The question is, “Are we willing to do that to ourselves, and if so, do we have the workers with the knowledge to make everything we are going to give up?” Yes, we have people who know how to make computers and microwaves, but do we have ENOUGH people that know, so that supply may keep up with demand?
greenfloyd July 9th, 2015 at 03:59
Nonetheless it’s the kind of shock that’s needed. But there’s even more important things the US must do first, before making demands or military intervention south of the US Border.
TuMadre, Ph.D July 9th, 2015 at 04:17
Unfortunately, it isn’t going to happen. If the Mexicans want things to change, they will need to do so themselves. We could provide indiscriminate aid, but little more. The US has no right to bully other countries into following its way of thinking, so long as the country in question hasn’t shown aggression towards the US. When we do, we usually are setting the clock on a time bomb for ourselves, where bad blood will wait for the day when it can strike back.
For better or worse, non-tyrannical countries have a right to self-determination.
greenfloyd July 9th, 2015 at 05:31
I’ve heard some rather convincing arguments Mexico is showing aggression towards the US by dumping their poor and supporting narco-terrorists. At the same time Americans need to admit we’re the ones who created the narco-terrorists and clean our own house first. The key to all this is American legalization of drugs. After that everything else becomes much easier.
The current situation is intolerable and unsustainable. Sooner of later Mexico will fall just as Honduras and Guatemala already have. We’re next if something dramatic and fundamental doesn’t change.
TuMadre, Ph.D July 9th, 2015 at 05:42
That is something I can completely agree with. Adults are adults, and can decide what to put in their bodies, and deal with the consequences accordingly. Legalize drugs, tax it to pay for the strict regulation of it (on par with ATF regulation), and the Mexican drug cartels will dry up very quickly.
TuMadre, Ph.D July 9th, 2015 at 05:52
That is something I can completely agree with. Adults are adults, and can decide what to put in their bodies, and deal with the consequences accordingly. Legalize drugs, tax it to pay for the strict regulation of it (on par with ATF regulation), and the Mexican drug cartels will dry up very quickly.
As for the US following suit, I’ve already accepted that as an inevitability. People don’t want to take the steps necessary to keep the country from declining, so it will decline.
greenfloyd July 10th, 2015 at 00:49
I had to think about that “decline” thing for awhile. I certainly hope you are wrong. To be honest I was rather put-off by your apparent aloofness and causal disregard… for your own country and fellow citizens!?
TuMadre, Ph.D July 10th, 2015 at 00:52
It’s a hard pill to swallow. Took me a while to get there. But both of those pictures are sadly accurate. I’m not going to lose sleep over what I can’t change. I’m going to be as happy as I can while preparing for the inevitable.
It sucks, but as the writer said, there’s nothing that can be done about it. Some of the people on this website give a perfect example as to why it will decline.
greenfloyd July 10th, 2015 at 01:07
Well spit that thing out of your mouth… I don’t buy it! You are too much of a thinking person to give-up that easy.
TuMadre, Ph.D July 10th, 2015 at 01:12
It’s come from a lot of thought. I didn’t buy it at first, but unless things change very drastically, it will happen. Are you ready for the US to stop being the World Police, even if it means that, until we secure our coasts and borders, more attacks will befall America? You ok with China gobbling up Japan? North Korea swallowing South Korea. ISIS growing unchecked? Israel falling?
Even if you are, are you also ready to cut all welfare benefits down to an absolute minimum, including Social Security? Are you ready to pay three times the worth of almost all non-food products when we leave the FTA and become a nation of producers again? Eventually, production jobs will pay enough to negate the increased cost, but that will take a few years, at minimum.
These things are just the beginning of what is required to stop the slow decline. And too many people are unwilling to do all of it.
greenfloyd July 9th, 2015 at 00:21
Headline – US invades Mexico, liberates Mexicans from oligarchy and drug cartels.
Tim Coolio July 8th, 2015 at 18:57
I love visiting the left coast!
Scott Tidwell July 8th, 2015 at 21:38
I don’t. Been there once and never again.
TuMadre, Ph.D July 8th, 2015 at 22:02
Too expensive for my tastes.
Scott Tidwell July 8th, 2015 at 22:11
oh yeah and that too. Everything in huge cities costs so much.
Tim Coolio July 8th, 2015 at 22:36
Then you don’t like travel!
when i go there this fall again it will be trip 5 for me for this year!
Scott Tidwell July 8th, 2015 at 22:38
Oh, I love to travel, don’t get me wrong on that, I just don’t like large cities. I can’t stand them. I’m too use to the “country” as some people would call it.
Tim Coolio July 8th, 2015 at 22:41
And one of the trips was by jet and one by Amtrak!
TO L.A.!
Scott Tidwell July 8th, 2015 at 22:43
Why not just drive? It’s much better that way :)
Tim Coolio July 8th, 2015 at 22:55
3 times this year!
just got back from the last one the other week!
TuMadre, Ph.D July 8th, 2015 at 23:11
I LOVE to travel! Just not to the west coast. I’ve already traveled to Glacier National Park this year, and had a blast!
Terry "Death to Equality" Xu July 8th, 2015 at 18:58
i rather like latinos, they’re fairly conservative if you approach them without the “persecuted minority” angle – gimme California over Seattle or something anyday
Larry Schmitt July 8th, 2015 at 19:18
That makes as much sense as someone saying he doesn’t like Asians. I know based on your previous posts you think our penchant for treating people like individuals is foolish, but your shallow generalizations are pointless.
tracey marie July 8th, 2015 at 19:41
I do not like that asian.
Larry Schmitt July 8th, 2015 at 19:42
Which is different from what he said. And I agree with you.
tracey marie July 8th, 2015 at 19:42
I was agreeing with you.
Larry Schmitt July 8th, 2015 at 19:43
No, I meant what you said is different from what he said.
tracey marie July 8th, 2015 at 19:47
:)
arc99 July 8th, 2015 at 19:31
Historical reality is not an “angle”.
Terry "Death to Equality" Xu July 8th, 2015 at 20:10
but persecuted minority is
if you really wanted to help latinos you’d encourage some kinda ethnic self-interest among them instead of merely equality or ‘compassion’
arc99 July 9th, 2015 at 02:13
If you had any valid ideas you would express them instead of parroting meaningless gibberish.
greenfloyd July 9th, 2015 at 00:02
I grew-up in SoCal listening to old Mexicans talk about taking it back and one day will kill all the white people or make them our garadeners and dishwashers… I never paid it no nevermind, still don’t.
But what the Mexicans need is take back their own government and economy from their own rich old right-wing Mexicans who steal the wealth and work with the drug cartels and push their poor on the US. The govt of Mexico is the problem, not most individual Mexicans.
amersham46 July 8th, 2015 at 19:31
Latinos may be conservative but the are not stupid
Scott Tidwell July 8th, 2015 at 21:37
ok and? What’s the point. Seems like someone is mocking or something here or trying to downgrade the whites. Who cares if one race outnumbers the other? I know I don’t give a flying 2 sh**s
tracey marie July 8th, 2015 at 22:11
I see that little puss tu madre brought backup
Scott Tidwell July 8th, 2015 at 22:16
huh? who?
tracey marie July 8th, 2015 at 22:21
lol, you have conversation on love stinks, stop lying like that little jerk does.
Glen July 9th, 2015 at 01:10
I’m sorry, but that’s an entirely un-called-for comment and incredibly intolerant. Especially since Scott’s comment was about race being irrelevant. He clearly misunderstood the point of the article, but calling him a troll for it is just plain inappropriate.
I don’t care if you find someone’s opinions distasteful, it’s really no justification for calling them names like that, especially on such a tenuous connection.
TuMadre, Ph.D July 9th, 2015 at 01:27
Don’t pay her any mind. She only knows how to upvote people who hold EXACTLY the same views as hers, or insult anyone who doesn’t.
I’ve been called a pedophile (once) and a racist (often) by her for no good reason in other threads.
tracey marie July 9th, 2015 at 16:46
stop whining
Glen July 9th, 2015 at 19:53
… are you being serious, right now? Or did you perhaps mean to post this in response to TuMadre?
tracey marie July 9th, 2015 at 21:41
I responded to the correct whiner
Glen July 10th, 2015 at 00:35
I didn’t realise that suggesting that you treat people with basic decency, not jump to conclusions, and not throw ad hominems instead of actually responding to arguments was now categorised as “whining”.
So now, apparently, even if someone agrees with you on most things, they’re a “whiner” if they think you’re being unnecessarily harsh. You have contributed NOTHING to this discussion, only whinged about an imagined connection between two people… but yes, I’m the whiner.
Glen July 9th, 2015 at 00:50
I think you misunderstand the point. It’s not a commentary on white vs latino. It’s a commentary on the Right Wing’s attitude towards those two groups. They have a tendency to demonise latinos (and blacks, and just about every other “non-white” category)… which is a problem for them when the “non-white” categories outnumber the “whites”.
You’ve probably heard the commentary, at some point, about Republicans on track to start losing every election if they don’t start treating minorities with respect, because minorities are going to collectively be the majority in America soon enough. This article is pointing out that it has already reached the point where the “majority” has changed entirely in California.
Scott Tidwell July 9th, 2015 at 00:59
I’m considered as a Republican, but I don’t demonise anyone. People are people. Race is nothing to me and never will be.
Only thing I can’t stand is illegals. After I found out that there were several and I mean several cities that have a sanctuary for illegals, I was shocked. So now cities are able to go against the laws? I’m not worried anymore though. I’m moving out of this country here in the next few years anyways.
Glen July 9th, 2015 at 01:36
Obviously, I’m not saying all those who consider themselves Republicans think that way. When I refer to “Republicans” in my previous comment, it’s referring to the politicians in the party, not individual supporters.
As for the whole “illegals” thing, I’ll take issue on a few points. First, describing them as “illegals” is a way to specifically downgrade people to being “lesser” than others – they’re still human beings, and deserve basic levels of respect (at least when you don’t actually know them at all – it’s different if an individual directly loses your respect, such as a politician). If you must leave off the word “immigrant”, use the term “undocumented” instead. Otherwise, call them “illegal immigrants”.
Second of all, illegal immigration doesn’t mean their lives are illegal, just their status in the country. And when it comes to America, it’s been shown pretty extensively that illegal immigrants actually contribute a lot to the economy, and don’t actually take jobs away from Americans. Keep in mind that many, if not most, illegal immigrants are actually running away from bad situations that they can’t do much about. Besides which, the first “Americans” (not referring to the natives) were technically illegal immigrants.
So have a little more compassion.
Scott Tidwell July 9th, 2015 at 01:44
Thank you for not generalizing me in the politicians as for I can not stand them, they all lie, on both sides.
I meant no disrespect by calling them illegals, my apologizes if I offended. I do not consider them lesser then anyone. Like you said they are human just as we are.
Also, I work with undocumented immigrants. I work in a jail, I watch them for 12 hours a day. I talk with them, I learn from them, and I try to help where I can, but I can say this. They are not as nice as you think they are, which at least the ones I watch over are not. They range from just simply getting caught and not having a green card or over staying their time they said they would be here, up to being murders/gang members. My compassion is there until they just take advantage of my generousity, then if they just become out of control, I show them my opposite side. Most of them have no respect for rules or laws, they really don’t, and it’s so frustrating and irritating. They are treated alot better then a normal civilian. They get everything, just about, that they want and they demand it, which really infuriates me. 85% of the guys I watch, or babysit lol, have huge felonies.
greenfloyd July 9th, 2015 at 01:53
This is truly shocking to read. Reminds me of something I saw recently about several jails along the East Coast that have essentially become Gangsta-culture, Gc, business centers. The level of corruption is off the charts.
Scott Tidwell July 9th, 2015 at 02:07
Yea, it’s bad and irritating. What people don’t know is that the guys that come here that are “running” from certain situations, are running from something that they started. Like the gang related ones are afraid to go back to their own country because of them getting killed as soon as they get there, because the airport might be in enemy territory. So, they act up to stay here longer. Their food might not be grand, but they have it much MUCH better then any inmate can dream of. They have to be treated differently because they are federal regulated, so we have to treat them really well. The others that are not gangster related, have drug trafficking charges, armed robbery, etc etc. They stay in for a year and poof they are out on the streets, where as if an American has 1 of those, he/she’s in for a few years with no probation or whatever.
greenfloyd July 9th, 2015 at 03:02
Yeah! And forget about it if an American got caught in Mexico doing some of this crap! Of course if you got enough money you can buy your way out of any Mexican jail… and probably a lot of American jails as well.
Glen July 10th, 2015 at 00:43
Once again, you need to be careful not to be too generalised. The ones that are landing in jail might be running from things that they started. What percentage of illegal immigrants are winding up in jail?
Basically, my concern is that you’re experiencing two common forms of bias – sampling bias and confirmation bias. The population you’re sampling isn’t “illegal immigrants”, it’s “illegal immigrants who land in jail”. And the ones that land in jail, but don’t cause a fuss and don’t return quickly after release aren’t going to stand out in your mind, so it seems like there are more fitting your observation than there actually are (kind of like how it always seems like, when you’re driving on a highway, everyone’s either driving significantly faster or slower than you – because the ones travelling around your speed aren’t going to pass you (or you them), and so they’re not as obvious).
How they have to be treated is a different issue… but my concern is how poorly America is treating its incarcerated citizens. That is, the problem isn’t special treatment for illegal immigrants, it’s bad treatment for citizens.
Scott Tidwell July 10th, 2015 at 00:51
When I say “They” I am meaning the ones that have come through my area lol. this would be better probably to have said.
On the incarcerated issue. So we need to give criminals temperpedic beds and nice pillows, give them anything they want? Make them happy and comfortable? If so, why would you want to leave all that? I would stay in jail if I were to get all that. Jail is not meant to be comfortable or nice.
Glen July 10th, 2015 at 00:57
It depends on what you believe jail’s purpose is. If you feel that jail is supposed to be punishment, then sure, it shouldn’t be comfortable.
If, on the other hand, jail is supposed to serve the purposes of rehabilitation and (temporary) removal from society until rehabilitation has occurred, then making their lives worse in jail will only harden them, and make rehabilitation all the less likely.
Ever looked at how jail is handled in the Nordic states? They’ve got very comfortable prisons, and yet they also have much lower recidivism rates. And when asked about it, ex-prisoners most certainly don’t want to return.
If your society is such that giving prisoners “nice pillows” means that they’d rather live in the prison than out in society, then your society has a problem.
Scott Tidwell July 10th, 2015 at 01:00
The rehabilitation depends on the person really. If they make jails hotel like, why would you want to leave something that you don’t have to pay for? Free cable, bed, food, water, etc? yea I would stay. You won’t have to pay a thing. I would definitely come back. Some people you just can’t rehabilitate. Do you also think capital murderers should go back out into society after being rehabilitated? btw I’m enjoying our convo :)
Glen July 10th, 2015 at 01:08
If you can’t rehabilitate them, you keep them in jail… but not as punishment. You do it to keep society safe. That applies for capital murderers, and for rapists, and for any other criminal – if they can’t be rehabilitated, they should be kept in jail for the sake of society.
As for “free cable, bed, food, water, etc”… personally, I believe that jails should have built-in economies regulated by the jail (not cigarette-based economies, or any of the other comparable types) – they earn the money they need to buy their food, etc. And if they do a good job, they should be able to earn more money than they need to spend, and when (if) they get out, they have earned some money along the way. And none of this “hard labour, because they’re criminals” attitude – any way that they can contribute should be acceptable, and paid at a reasonable rate.
And again, if society is such that people would prefer to live in jail than in society, it speaks poorly of your society. And who said anything about cable? I don’t see a need for that, unless they can pay for it.
Scott Tidwell July 10th, 2015 at 01:12
Our taxes pay for it. When you have people saying we should make things more comfortable for criminals thats what happens. Remember our taxes pay for all this. More comfortable we make the jails the higher the taxes go up. That’s what I guess I’m more bothered with.
Glen July 10th, 2015 at 01:28
And that’s a more reasonable issue to take… but like I said, I believe prisons should have their own money system, in order to cut costs (by having inmates actually buy their food, etc). Most of all, though, you guys need to stop privatising your jail system. The government doesn’t have to make a profit, private organisations do (they’re legally obligated to do it!). The result is that the tax burden is higher than it should be.
But then, if you spent a bit more in the right way, it could reduce the long-term cost. Australia pays more than twice as much per inmate per day than America does. But America incarcerates more than 4 times as many people per capita than Australia does. Your three-year recidivism rate is about two thirds (that is, two thirds of all inmates will end up in jail again within three years), and your five-year recidivism rate is about three quarters. Our ten-year recidivism rate is under 40%.
TuMadre, Ph.D July 10th, 2015 at 05:10
Remember that the socialist paradise is prison. There’s free housing, free food, free clothing, free medical care, and it’s diverse.
Working is possible for all, and sometimes even mandatory. The means of production is owned by the state, so there is no risk of becoming unemployed (and even if you were, you have free food, housing, and medical care!).
Weapons are not only unneeded, due to guards patrolling regularly, but also banned, as there are major repercussions for having even a sharpened toothbrush.
The only thing you lose is freedom, the things that those evil Republicans and Libertarians hate.
So, when presented with all that knowledge, why WOULDN’T they want it to be comfortable, on top of that?
Scott Tidwell July 10th, 2015 at 05:28
I’m considered a Republican and I don’t want ANYONE to lose their freedom. I believe and stand by the constitution. I believe government should be less involved in things and only IN things that are actually important.
Rehabilitation should be only for the minor offenses. Anything that is considered a felony no rehabilitation like jails.
TuMadre, Ph.D July 10th, 2015 at 05:33
I agree with you. But I’m a libertarian, so I’m willing to take on some personal responsibility in exchange for more freedom. Not everybody is.
Scott Tidwell July 10th, 2015 at 05:52
As long as we get more freedom I’m up for it!!!
TuMadre, Ph.D July 10th, 2015 at 06:00
You and me both. I’m not an anarchist, but the federal government shouldn’t be taxing more than roughly 10 percent of its GDP, in my opinion, not the ~40 percent that it currently taxes. You, being a republican, are likely aiming at the 20-30 percent taxation. Democrats are aiming at the 50-60 percent taxation, typically.
Scott Tidwell July 10th, 2015 at 06:05
Yep. I work hard and miss alot of things in life with the job I have. The money I work hard for should be going to my family and I. Not assholes that “can’t” work, more like won’t work and lie to the government about it AND get away with it. SS should go back up but taxes NEED to go down, the more taxes are taken out, the more it’s going to hurt the people. There will be more people in poverty and the rich get richer. I honestly think they are going to try and get rid of the middle class.
TuMadre, Ph.D July 10th, 2015 at 06:11
SS should be dismantled, in my opinion. I say this knowing full well that I will lose my entire investment in thus far (15 years at this point). It’s unsustainable and won’t be around forever anyways. Keep in mind that on top of your FICA tax, SS also took 25% of all Federal tax dollars last year.
It was a nice thought, but, in the end, you are going to rely on your family, and, evenutally, the Smith and Wesson Retirement Plan
Scott Tidwell July 10th, 2015 at 06:14
Is it really getting that bad with SS? wtf. lol Smith and Wesson Retirement Plan HA.
TuMadre, Ph.D July 10th, 2015 at 06:39
I’ll let you decide that for yourself. That said, here is the federal tax breakdown from my last paycheck:
Federal: 46.15
FICA: 83.15
Medicare: 19.45
Now, last tax season, over the entire course of the year, I was shy about 25 bucks, so we will say a buck per pay period, and add that to my taxes.
So, even presuming that SS isn’t consuming federal taxes, the tax breakdown would be:
Retirement stuff: 102.60
Everything else at the Federal Level: 47.15
Now, taking into consideration that SS IS consuming about 25% of all federal taxes, the breakdown is:
Retirement Stuff: 114.37
Everything else: 35.36
Do either of these breakdowns seem reasonable to you, considering you live on an extraordinarily limited budget, and the Medicare is such trash that almost everyone needs a supplement plan (further reducing your limited budget) when you retire?
It was a good try, but the cost isn’t worth the benefit. Work until you can’t, take your pension/401k/savings, and help your children in exchange for 3 hots and a cot. If you are too burdensome, it’s time to make your peace with death, rather than bankrupting the family and living a miserable existence.
greenfloyd July 10th, 2015 at 00:59
You and Scott are making good points here…
Glen the Mexicans and Central Americans Scott sees are not “immigrants.” Most of them are career criminals working the system. The system we built and must replace before we become as lawless as Mexico and points south…
Scott you are faced with an intolerable situation, I don’t know how you can keep you sanity. I admire your perseverance and I hope one day, soon, we’ll sort out this mess!
Glen July 10th, 2015 at 01:12
I’d still call them immigrants, because they immigrated, whether they did so for good or bad purposes.
Meanwhile, I think describing it as a risk of America ending up just like Mexico is rather hyperbolic. Of course, the easiest way to deal with the risk that does exist is to actually establish some sensible gun control. It speaks volumes that the gun homicide rate in the US is over 10 people per 100,000 per year, whereas here in Australia, it’s about 1 person per 100,000 per year.
Scott Tidwell July 10th, 2015 at 01:16
Gun control………I suggest not going there lol. That’ll start a whole NEW debate.
Things are changing and is it for the better side or just going to get worse. I honestly believe it’s going to get worse.
TuMadre, Ph.D July 10th, 2015 at 01:24
I think total homicide rate is more relevant than gun homicide rate, though I don’t know the stats. If people don’t have guns, it won’t stop them from killing with a knife or a car if they want to.
Glen July 10th, 2015 at 01:39
Before anything else, I need to slightly correct myself (and I’ll edit it into my previous comment, too) – those numbers were the gun death rates. Gun homicide rates are significantly lower in the US. Here are the stats for gun homicide and total homicide.
Gun deaths in the US in 2013: 10.64 per 100,000.
Gun homicide in the US in 2013: 3.55 per 100,000.
Total homicide in the US in 2013: 5.10 per 100,000.
Non-gun homicide (calculated): 1.55 per 100,000.
Gun deaths in Australia in 2012: 1.03 per 100,000.
Gun homicide in Australia in 2012: 0.18 per 100,000.
Total homicide in Australia in 2012: 1.24 per 100,000.
Non-gun homicide (calculated): 1.06 per 100,000.
So Australia’s non-gun homicide rate is a bit lower, but not dramatically so. But the gun homicide rate is FAR lower – less than 5% of the US’s. Note that I’ve used the most recent data for each – 2013 for US and 2012 for Australia.
greenfloyd July 10th, 2015 at 02:33
Both Australia and America were founded by people kicked out of England… today there are many similarities in the two cultures.
The obvious question is: What is the cause of this big discrepancy in violence and gun deaths? I submit it’s largely explained by America’s ubiquitous Gangsta-culture, Gc. And thanks to it, legal gun control is almost irrelevant!
TuMadre, Ph.D July 10th, 2015 at 04:28
My rebuke to this is simply that the US and Australia doesn’t have all that similar of a makeup. For example, their gang population isn’t the same, and gang members are more resourceful than people give them credit for.
Personally, I believe that the argument for stripping citizens from their right to carry and use guns is a bad idea. Why? Pic related helps illustrate a bit of the problem I have.
greenfloyd July 10th, 2015 at 04:45
So do you live in a high crime area or do risky work? Why do you need, or think you need, “several firearms” is perhaps what we should be discussing?
TuMadre, Ph.D July 10th, 2015 at 04:55
I do not, and I do not. As for “needs,” I don’t need to discuss the need. It’s part of the Bill of Rights, not the Bill of Needs. Just like I don’t need to discuss the need for my right to privacy, or my need to my right to free speech.
That said, because you’ve been reasonable with me in the past, I won’t just leave it at that. The revolver is good for home invasions, as it doesn’t jam, and isn’t so big to be a hindrance The semi-auto rifle is good for hunting deer, as well as a decent all-around outdoor defense gun. The shotgun is good for duck/goose hunting, as well as crowd control, whether it be wolves, coyotes, or, worst case scenario, if the state falls, groups of looters.
There is also the concern that no government is guaranteed to not go tyrannical, and guns allow you to resist government tyranny. Otherwise, you can face things like Hitler’s Nazi horrors, and Stalin’s Communism, where they attempted to expel or kill all Jews inside their borders.
greenfloyd July 10th, 2015 at 05:46
My first concern was your personal safety, not political.
I only mentioned it because you gave me the impression you were facing a more immediate threat, i.e. resorting to extreme measures to conceal your rather unimpressive arms cache.
Besides, I though we were supposed to slip into the “Decline” like an old-man into a hot tub? :) Isn’t resistance futile?
TuMadre, Ph.D July 10th, 2015 at 05:52
When the government comes to take away law-abiding gun owners’ guns, the concern covers both, as politics and my personal safety are not two mutually exclusive things. Thus, to insure my liberty, I would bury my firearms in waterproof bag, in a field and say that I sold them, then dig them up when the time was right.
I think that two pistols, two shotguns, and two semi-auto rifles (with 5 separate 50 round magazines per person on hand for the rifles, plus more ammo available) is more than enough for two people..
Saving the nation as it is now IS futile. Saving the family is not.
greenfloyd July 10th, 2015 at 06:13
Well you have to be the judge of all that… I just hope you are not feeding into a self-fulfilling prophecy. Worse case, a trained sniper takes you out, dispatches your family within 5 minutes.
TuMadre, Ph.D July 10th, 2015 at 06:14
Best case scenario: Government doesn’t go tyrannical because they are afraid to kick down doors without good reason.
greenfloyd July 10th, 2015 at 02:13
Real “immigrants” do not come here to do harm. There is a significant number of Mexican and Central American nationals repeatedly moving over the US Mexico border who are criminals, many with extensive arrests for violent crimes in both Mexico and the US. So, I think we need to stop confusing this element of international Gangsta-culture with any “immigration” issue.
I believe the only thing that can prevent the fall of Mexico and the US will be the the legalization and regulation of all drugs. We can’t control illegal guns, and we’ll never change that without creating regulated markets that can settle disputes in courts instead of the streets or out in the vast Mexican killing fields…
Glen July 9th, 2015 at 02:09
You work with undocumented immigrants in a jail… that’s not really representative of all undocumented immigrants. The fact that so many of the ones in jail have huge felonies should be the hint – people don’t get asked for green cards that often, so far more of the ones who end up in jail will have broken serious laws. The ones that are nice, the ones that don’t break laws (beyond immigration laws), are just living their lives, and most don’t really get a whole lot.
Scott Tidwell July 9th, 2015 at 02:15
I’m not generalizing them for the whole people. There have been a few well mannered immigrants, but most of the well mannered ones will shock the hell out of you, because they are usually the ones that have the most felonies. The immigrants come through my unit like crazy, I’m having a quite a few leaving every week and brought in the next day.
Pamela Whorrall July 9th, 2015 at 06:22
And that is really sad bc as u said. They HAVE to be treated differently bc of the federal regulations and such involving all of that. I somewhat worked inside a prison. Not as a guard but as a counselor. The undocumented inmates I had a whole different set of guidelines than the general population. It was nuts and i thought very unfair. The crimes they committed weren’t different but the sentencing sure was. The accommodation provided certainly was. It truly made me leave inside the gates and deal with them on the outside and when u was proposition ed to oversee a federal outpatient treatment program I was quick to decline the offer. I stayed with dealing with the state paroles in the halfway house I got up and running. That was my niche and I was comfortable there.
Pamela Whorrall July 9th, 2015 at 06:32
Yep. To think there are cities in the good Ole U.S of A that will protect illegals is sickening. That lady that died in her dad’s arms. That man was released from jail 5 separate times and I believe they said deported? But funny (not funny ha ha) he sure knew where to go in the u.s that that city would protect him. I wanna know what the heck has happened to our country? Where did we go? The STRONG FORMIDIBLE country we once were. Not the laughing stock we are now. I have zero respect for our government. They are all crooks, liars, thieves, cheats, and the list goes on. But that’s just me. If it’s this bad now, I hate to think what 10 yrs from now will be. *shudders*
Scott Tidwell July 9th, 2015 at 06:39
Too many people who are sympathetic towards undocumented immigrants and criminals. That’s what happened. We have come to the era of being softies now. I wouldn’t be surprise if our prez raised the white surrender flag if we were attacked today….I really wouldn’t be surprised. I have no respect as well for most of the government because of, as you said, they are crooks, liars, cheaters, etc etc.
Pamela Whorrall July 9th, 2015 at 07:00
Exactly! When I lived in Texas, true story. I was crossing border to go into Mexico. Vacation. They had tighter border patrol going INTO Mexico. Now coming back, same border. We got thru border patrol no problems. Explain that. That was 18 years ago. I was pregnant with my 2nd child. And yes. Obama is looking for a band aid approach for everything. I’m not sure if it’s bc his term is almost up and he just wants to dump all this in the next presidents lap or if he’s the coward he truly appears to be. I’m sorry. To me, he comes across as a coward. Placating countries that mean us harm? Wow. Maybe I’m looking at it all wrong. I don’t know. But to negotiate and increase access to nuclear weapons KNOW ING that those weapons would be used on us? Ummmmmmn. Why would he agree to that? But I absolutely LOVE how Trump is coming out about the illegals bc that’s an approach no one else wants to get near. :) ooooooh I hope he stays in the race
TuMadre, Ph.D July 9th, 2015 at 01:30
I think that Republican’s are set to lose so long as they try to appeal to “moderates Republicans,” in a desperate attempt to appeal to people who really have no interest in voting for Republicans at all. When they do that, they also get a lot of their own base to lose steam, evidenced by the 1 million Republicans who stayed home last presidential election.
Glen July 9th, 2015 at 01:38
If you honestly believe that Republicans should be focusing entirely on their own base, and ignoring the rest of the country, then you really need to reconsider your entire outlook on politics.
TuMadre, Ph.D July 9th, 2015 at 01:42
I think the stance they have now appeals to a very small number of people, even inside their own base, and isn’t appealing to enough outside of the base. If they need to change their stances, that’s fine, but to have candidates try to go from super-conservative in the primaries to centrist in the general election makes them seem like they are not genuine, which spurns the very people that put them in the general election.
I think that’s why the Libertarianism is growing. You can say whatever you want about them, but most libertarians at least tend to be consistent in their message.
Glen July 9th, 2015 at 02:20
But see, that’s kind of the point – they’re not being genuine in the general election (or they’re not being genuine in the primary, in which case you can’t really trust them to be genuine in the general anyway). And this pattern is actually far more common among republican candidates.
Compare with the democratic candidates. Hillary is already behaving as a moderate. Bernie Sanders is definitely more to the left, and is very likely to remain so in the general election.
Libertarianism is growing because while a lot of people are still economic liberals (meaning, right-wing – “economic liberals” believe in freedom in the economy; in other words, the free market), on social issues, most people are a lot more progressive than the republicans. Libertarianism is basically a worldview that agrees with Republicans on economic issues, but with Democrats on social issues. Strictly speaking, they should be called Liberals, not Libertarians, although unfortunately different groups have claimed the Liberal term in different countries. In America, the left has claimed “liberal” for their socially liberal beliefs. Here in Australia, the right has claimed “liberal” for their economically liberal beliefs. So the Liberal Party of Australia is a right wing party (and basically the equivalent of the Republicans).
TuMadre, Ph.D July 9th, 2015 at 02:28
“But see, that’s kind of the point”
I’m aware, that’s why I made it.
Libertarians believe in personal choice, and personal consequences for those choices, with the state being necessary to protect your rights and your property. For example, I’m a libertarian, and I don’t have a problem with State Gay marriage (just so long as they don’t force it down the throats of religious institutions), but I do have a problem with people suing Christian cake makers who don’t want to exchange their cakes for money when it comes to gay marriages (so long as they don’t refuse gay people all of their cakes as a rule). They can deal with the public fallout from that, as well as any lost income in relation to that decision.
allison1050 July 9th, 2015 at 05:31
Where did you get “downgrade the whites” from?
Scott Tidwell July 9th, 2015 at 05:34
eh I was abit on the grumpy side earlier. I’m just so tired of hearing about race, flags, gays, etc etc. Just plain sick of hearing people bi**h and complain about every single thing.
Pamela Whorrall July 9th, 2015 at 06:13
Uh oh. Lol. Then u r gonna hate my post on my channel. Lol!
allison1050 July 9th, 2015 at 06:31
I can understand your feelings but it’s a fact of life.
Scott Tidwell July 9th, 2015 at 06:41
Very true. I just wonder what the world would be like if there was just ONE day of no one bitching or whinning (sorry for the language but it is what it is) about stupid and useless crap. I just wonder what it would be like………
allison1050 July 9th, 2015 at 08:25
Where’s Utopia?
Scott Tidwell July 8th, 2015 at 22:35
No, I couldn’t understand the sentence until now. Also, he didn’t bring backup. This is how I feel. I answered to some of TuMadres comments yes, but as I said I found this on a site and said something that was my own opinion.
tracey marie July 8th, 2015 at 22:44
go with that, troll
Scott Tidwell July 8th, 2015 at 22:46
Yea, done here. When idiocy starts spewing, I leave.
tracey marie July 8th, 2015 at 22:54
buh bye!
TuMadre, Ph.D July 9th, 2015 at 01:34
Don’t let her discourage you from this site. She is literally tied with Candidate 34 (or something like that) for the most stupid, hateful person on the site. There are plenty of reasonable people on this site, however, and it can make for good debate.
If you enjoy seeing how angry and stupid people can get, engage her. Otherwise, pretend she doesn’t exist.
Scott Tidwell July 9th, 2015 at 01:36
Oh I’m not discouraged from this site. This site is by far the best social site I have ever been on, seriously. I just disengaged in the stupidity for now, but I have my days and it is noted of who to get started then :) thank you!
greenfloyd July 9th, 2015 at 00:45
That’s great! Now is the time to start recruiting these so-called “Latinos” for Operation Mexico Freedom and bring down the old-Mexico oligarchy and crush the drug cartels. Look-out Mexico!
BB July 9th, 2015 at 01:22
Is this a white guilt self-hating trip? I do not get it.
Glen July 9th, 2015 at 01:40
Not at all. It’s just mockery of Republican politicians who insist on demonising non-whites.
BB July 9th, 2015 at 02:59
But to mock black or Latino politicians by saying that in other places that they are outnumbered would be grossly insulting to Latinos and blacks. Is there a different rule for whites because of slavery?
Glen July 9th, 2015 at 03:11
… you really have a problem, if you read what I said, and interpret it to be a black/latino vs white thing. Like I said, the issue at hand is the way that Republican politicians demonise minorities. If black or latino politicians were demonising white people, and white people were growing in numbers in their area, then they’d be mocked for it in the same way. It has nothing to do with race, and everything to do with intolerance on the part of republican politicians at the moment. And it’s not because they’re republican, it’s because of the attitude.
BB July 9th, 2015 at 10:40
Mocking the attitude of the prejudiced has an unhealthy dose of the vanity of the pure in it. Is there some cheap gratification to be gained by insulting the benighted right? Or are you just becoming like them with your catcalls across the divide? Satire is one thing. Low level trolling is another. In last couple of years Republican trolls have dragged own their liberal and progressive opponents to the same level. And look at you now. I question it and you are ready to call me a racist. Fox News has got you by the balls.
Glen July 9th, 2015 at 11:18
Nobody is trolling, here. Mocking those who would demonise is a way to turn something dark into something light – as in, lighthearted. If they wanted to troll, they’d have said something like “Republicans now a permanent minority”. This is just mild mockery, worded in such a way as to serve as advice. And in truth, the article was about the interesting fact about demographics in California, and only the headline itself does the mocking. Besides which, I wasn’t involved in the article.
And where did I call you a racist? I said you have a problem if that’s the way you interpret my explanation, and I stand by it, but “problem” doesn’t mean “racist”. You don’t have to be racist to interpret everything that people say (even in a context such as this) as being about race.
In addition, I’d suggest that mocking the attitude of the prejudiced is a healthy outlet for frustration at that attitude. When you have republicans openly calling mexican immigrants rapists, calling for bans on mosques because of all of those damn terrorists, and declaring that there’s a war on Christmas because someone said “Happy Holidays” to them… gently commenting on them needing to notice the demographics of California (a state with a huge number of electoral votes, and that had a two term Republican governor not that long ago) really isn’t “an unhealthy dose of vanity” of any sort. It’s probably the best approach possible.
Finally, I should point out that I’m Australian, and thus it’s kind of silly to be making such assertions about me. I follow American politics out of fascination, because Australian politics is nowhere near as vitriolic, even from our right wing (who seem to be slowly learning the techniques of the Republicans… so in a sense, I’m watching US politics to have some insight into what might be in Australia’s future).
By the way, you didn’t question the mockery of the prejudiced. You asserted that it was about race, that it was “a white guilt self-hating trip”. You might want to look back over your comments and think about it, given the argument you’re now putting forward.
allison1050 July 9th, 2015 at 05:30
So why did you, BB, bring up “Black or Latino politicians”? Do you even understand the subject of the article?
BB July 9th, 2015 at 10:34
You brought up Republican politicians dearie. Just replying to your comment with parallelism of example. Which you ignored and diverted into aggressive hints of racism.
Glen July 9th, 2015 at 11:20
In what ways are black or latino politicians equivalent to republican politicians? Where is the “parallel” between the two, in this context?
allison1050 July 9th, 2015 at 13:32
You having issues with reading comprehension BB? I was reading the comments and stopped long enough to ask WHY DID YOU, BB, BRING UP “Black or Latino politicians”…I didn’t ask YOU about Repubs. Do you understand now or is it still too difficult a question for you? If you can’t answer that’s alright with me just don’t try and change the subject TROLL ’cause we have a resident TROLL and you’ll never be able to replace him.
arc99 July 9th, 2015 at 11:00
As far as I am concerned it is entirely justified to mock anyone who demonizes whole grops of people.
As far as blacks and Latinos, there are countless articles on immigration and census trends related to blacks and Latinos. And guess what. No one is whining about those articles.
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/06/26/u-s-hispanic-and-asian-populations-growing-but-for-different-reasons/
U.S. Hispanic and Asian populations growing, but for different reasons
booker25 July 9th, 2015 at 10:02
Many years ago while in school (living in CA) our teacher told us this would happen, so not surprised. And it will continue across the nation.