But that isn't a matter of "gerrymandering" unless you repeal the entire state-level representation of Congress. Yes, Democrats occupy the House seats from the highly populated states -- they're going to get more of the popular vote and that is why a national popular vote count doesn't matter. States like Kansas and Texas don't elect more Republicans because they're gerrymandered -- they elect more republicans because they contain more Republicans (remember, the gerrymandering is used in some states to create safet "minority" districts).
Doing The Math
- Thread starter Zam-Zam
- Start date
But that isn't a matter of "gerrymandering" unless you repeal the entire state-level representation of Congress. Yes, Democrats occupy the House seats from the highly populated states -- they're going to get more of the popular vote and that is why a national popular vote count doesn't matter. States like Kansas and Texas don't elect more Republicans because they're gerrymandered -- they elect more republicans because they contain more Republicans (remember, the gerrymandering is used in some states to create safet "minority" districts).
fairsheet
Senator
I think that in order for your gerrymander apologia to have any merit, you would need to suggest prior American examples of one party winning the Congressional popular vote going away, and the other party maintaining a significant majority.
I'd do the research but frankly, I'm not interested in doing it. I'm confident that the GOP's 2010 "redistricting" regime is going to end up biting them in the ass big time. The successful political party needs to maintain a certain level of flexibility and nimbleness, in order that it can react quickly to the unanticipated. GOP "redistricting" will make that more difficult for them and tend to lock in their weaknesses.
This sort of hints me at all those states who saw the homohate wedgie slipping away, so they rushed in to pass homohating Constitutional Amendments. The "idea" was that since it was so difficult to change their Constitutions, these efforts would form a "Great Wall of Homophobia" to fend off the trend/hoards.
But, they didn't anticipate just how quickly and overwhelmingly, homohate would be relegated to the political dung heap. And now...they're stuck with trying to overcome their pathetic amendments.
What taxes are at historical lows? My realestate taxes went up 80% in 10 years. Sales tax is the highest its ever been. And my paycheck shrunk at the start of the year...again
fairsheet
Senator
Did your real estate taxes go up because the voters in your area raised the mil?....or because the value of your real estate increased?
A rather important piece of knowledge to consider. Our rate went down, our appraisal tripled and our RE taxes have doubled in 15 years. The county tops out rate increases, so we have a 10% increase every year. Right now...we're in the $2,300 range...
OldGaffer
Governor
Sorry, federal taxes as a % of GDP, to make myself clearer. Around 15% now, have historicallly been around 22%.
EatTheRich
President
No chance of that. Politically, progressive domestic policy has only been successful in the U.S. when coupled with hawkish foreign policy (Theodore Roosevelt, Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt, Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson). That combination is no longer possible because the military budget has swallowed up the capacity to fund progressive social programs.
EatTheRich
President
Each state has a number of representatives proportional to its total population. When states elect more Republicans proportional to the number of people voting for Republicans in those states, because these states have district boundaries that tend to dilute Democratic strength and increase Republican strength, that's how we end up getting a Democratic majority in the popular vote and a Republican majority in the House.
Must have been a vote because the value of my real estate is the same today as it was in 1999 when I bought it.
fairsheet
Senator
It is possible that your bill has increased by 80%, even as your value hasn't changed. But, it seems a little farfetched. I mean...seriously, the value didn't increase during the mid-00's? The first thing we need to know I suppose, is if you're talking assessed value or actual value. If your assessed value is the same as it was in '99, you very well could and should be paying more than you did back then, but 80% more?...there's gotta me more to this than meets the eye.
Nope. Actual value from multiple appraisals shows my house just 1.3% higher than when I bought it in 1999. Yet my real estate taxes went from 2,000 to 3,600 per half. With inflation, I'd say its devalued.
The original response I made was to a person that said taxes are at an all time low. I argued that just isn't true. Realestate taxes, sales tax and others are at all time highs.
My salary is the same as it was in 2004.
OldGaffer
Governor
Then you should be voting Democratic, all the productivity increases over the last 20 years have gone to the 1%, nothing to workers, that is why your pay is the same as it was in 2004. My pay is the same as it was in 2000.
You are paid what you are worth. No more and no less. Democrats wish to redistribute wealth which is a strange concept in a free market.
OldGaffer
Governor
EatTheRich
President
Honey Boo Boo and her family are worth $15,000-$20,000 per episode, each. Because they are so useful to society.
