Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: combjelly who wrote (680563)	10/23/2012 3:30:18 PM
From: longnshort	Respond to of 1572139

52 Percent of Californians Say a Decade of Gov’t Spending Lowered the Quality of Life in the Golden State Emily Ekins\|Oct. 23, 2012 12:58 pm According to the Tax Foundation, California state spending has increased 42 percent per capita adjusted for inflation since 2000. The October Reason-Rupe poll asked Californians if this increased spending improved their quality of life, decreased the quality of life in California or had no significant impact. In fact, we find a majority, 52 percent, says this increased state spending decreased their quality of life in the state. Fourteen percent say it has improved the quality of life in the Golden State, and 28 percent say it has had no significant impact. In other words, 80 percent of Californians think this near 50 percent increase in state spending either made things worse or made no difference. This comports with the average Californian thinking the state wastes an average of 50 cents of every dollar it spends. Likewise, this may also explain why a majority (56 percent) favors rolling back California state spending per capita to 2000 levels, adjusted for inflation. Despite the fierce opposition that tends to emerge whenever lawmakers attempt to cut government spending, majorities across nearly every demographic and political group favor rolling California state spending back to 2000 levels. Perhaps using 2000 as a baseline provides some grounding to the uncertainty that emerges whenever someone calls for cutting spending. Californians don’t seem to recall government spending being too low in 2000 and thus are willing to consider rolling spending back to those levels. California telephone poll conducted October 11th-15th on both landline and cell phones, 696 adults, margin of error +/- 3.8%. The sample also includes 508 likely voters, with a margin of error of +/- 5.1%. Columns may not add up to 100% due to rounding. Full methodology can be found here. Full poll results found here.

To: combjelly who wrote (680563)	10/23/2012 4:07:26 PM
From: jlallen	3 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572139

Dumbukk: Who said Iran shares a border with Syria? Not Romney. What Syria has that Iran does not is access to ports in the Mediterrnean Sea.....doofus. Which it is obvious to all but partisan, braindead dumbfukks like you is what Romney meant..... Try not to sound like such an ignoramus for a change. And do us all a favor and STFU. You stupid BS is tiresome....

To: combjelly who wrote (680563)	10/23/2012 6:38:08 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1572139

BTW who knew Iran shares a border with Syria and Iran's route to the sea. No kidding. And it isn't like that was the first time he had used it. He has been saying this since February. Just another example of how the Right has constructed a complete, alternate reality. Now even geography has a liberal-bias... And you know its not true.......Iran doesn't have a seaport. Its landlocked. Liberals have redone the maps to make it look like it has a port......in their attempts to make Mitt and his fellow wingers look bad. Liberals are diabolical to the nth degree.....don't you know.