The Great Debate - Free College For All

[sanantone]

And, those incentives resulted in red states being poorer? You just said that it's not a red or blue problem, but you blamed one party for incentivizing welfare. For something to be an incentive, it has to actually incentivize people. So, where are all the Democratic state politicians incentivizing so many people in the South to be on welfare? Are they governors in most of these states? Do they control the house and senate in these states? Are most of their U.S. senators and representatives Democrats? How about the Republicans who run their governments haven't done enough to incentivize education and not having a bunch of babies you can't afford at such a young age? Most people in Mississippi are not farmers, and birth control works if you take it. 

To you, it is a red/blue problem because you did not respond to LifeLongLearning; you responded to me. The bias is clear as day. When I shared states offering free medical school, the only response you could come up with was something negative because those states happen to be blue states, so I already know how biased you are.

---

This is what I've found when searching for the most rural states. It looks like being rural and/or having a small population doesn't exactly correlate with being one of the poorest states.

The 10 states with the largest proportion of their land area classified as rural are: 1. Alaska, 2. Wyoming, 3. Montana, 4. North Dakota, 5. South Dakota, 6. Idaho, 7. New Mexico, 7. Nebraska, 9. Nevada, and 10. Utah. (Just for an example, 99.05% of Alaska’s land area is classified as rural by the Census Bureau.)

The states with the largest amount of land area classified as rural are: 1. Alaska, 2. Texas, 3. California, 4. Montana, 5. New Mexico, 6. Arizona, 7. Nevada, 8. Colorado, 9. Wyoming, and 10. Oregon.

I don't see West Virginia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, or Arkansas on either of these lists.

Well, it looks like Mississippi doesn't fall into the top 10 for agrarian states either. There are states in the top 10 with similar and smaller populations that have more farmland and produce more agricultural goods, and they're not as poor as Mississippi.

Since you obviously want to spar, I'll rise to the occasion. 

First, I didn't read what LifeLongLearning said, I read what you said, so you can put your "bias" card back in the deck. You're right, I did say "it's not a red or blue problem." I stand by that statement, all day. It's also true that one party does incentivize social welfare more than the other; another statement I stand by. Just because you see contradiction doesn't mean that it exists. For the record, I'm a registered independent, calling it as I've seen it without political motivation. I don't toe a party line.

I didn't read the rest of your diatribe about Democrats and Republicans. 

Next, I'm not really sure what the top ten state rurality proportions have to do with anything I said unless you're trying to somehow mitigate my point. I didn't say anything about Mississippi being one of the most agrarian states either, so you might change your conversational modality. 

Fact #1: Mississippi's main exports are cotton, soybeans and other agricultural products, hence it's an agrarian state.

Fact #2: Mississippi is currently and historically rural. So much so that nearly all of it qualifies for USDA Rural Development home loans. The State is federally designated as "underserved" in many areas, not the least of which, is medicine. Check out stats on the USDA and HRSA websites yourself to resolve any doubts you have.

I've noticed with people who are actually prone to bias, that they often attack others out of insecurity then interpret negative feedback from those attacked to affirm their views. It's cyclical.

Since you're rehashing old threads, I'm more than happy to share my reasons for not wanting to go to medical school in New York.

If you'll recall my original post in the thread you reference, I said (verbatim):

That's great for people who want to stay in New York, working primary care. As for me, I'll gladly take the debt load and live elsewhere. 

I'm a.) not interested in primary care, b.) not interested in paying high taxes (neither blue nor red states). 

Anything else you'd like me to clarify?

You responded to me, so I believe you're the one who wants to spar.

Mississippi has a lot of rural areas. And? You entirely missed the point of my post. It wasn't about whether Mississippi is rural or agrarian. It was about how being rural and agrarian is not an excuse for the poverty in the Deep South because states in other regions of the country that are more rural and more agrarian aren't nearly as poor. There are other reasons for why there are so many failures in the Deep South, but the social science lesson will throw the thread off topic more than it already is. If anyone cares to know, however, I will gladly type up a lengthy post.

You also missed the point of my original post. I don't know how you could read my post and not see the post I quoted. If Democrats wanted to keep people poor, then they are doing a bad job at it because Republicans in the Deep South have them beat. It's not that being a red state correlates with poverty; it's that being in a Democratic-controlled state does not correlate with poverty. LifeLongLearning made an idiotic, highly-political, off-topic statement. Like usual, the conservatives around here are being hypocrites by not addressing the person who started the exchange.