10

And the Survey SAYS...

Posted by sdesapio 11 years, 11 months ago to Entertainment
233 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

A few weeks ago we asked you, the Atlas Shrugged community, to fill out an anonymous online survey. Thousands of you responded and, while we will NEVER divulge any personally identifiable information about any of our members, following are some very interesting meta results.

Gulch, here's who we are...

- - -

Sex
29% Female
71% Male

- - -

Age
6% Under 30
26% 30-49
43% 50-65
23% Over 65

- - -

Marital Status
15% Single
4% Cohabitating
66% Married
10% Divorced
2% Widowed

- - -

Political Affiliation
2% Democrat
18% Independent
23% Libertarian
35% Republican
16% Tea Party

- - -

Voted in the 2012 Presidential Election
93% Voted
3% Did not vote
3% Not registered to Vote

- - -


All Comments


Previous comments...   You are currently on page 6.
  • Posted by khalling 11 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    while I do not deny certain statistics you mention, I disagree with your conclusions, though interesting. To focus on women's voting habits as a block is to miss the forest for the trees. Athens, Rome-both male dominated societies, fell for the same reason.
    “The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money.”
    ― Alexis de Tocqueville
    Pretty sure at the time of this writing, Congress was all MALE.
    The problems always stem from lack of property rights. Property rights' erosion accounts for massive debt, govt over-reach, govt spying on its citizens, graft and gratuity, lack of economic growth and wealth creation. Women cannot be blamed for the decisions of legislators and judges. They are in the minority of decision making power currently and past. As long as enough people in a group feel it's ok to steal an individual's property and ignore their rights, we are doomed to eventual failure.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by BambiB 11 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    One should not tolerate stupidity.

    If you tolerate stupidity, you get more of it.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by BambiB 11 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Actually, I think it would be very interesting to include a week or two where science meets religion in the classroom. An explanation of the scientific method - applying it to religion - would be most instructive. Conversely, applying the "religious method" to science (locking up Galileo because he said the earth was not the center of the universe, and the sun did not revolve around the earth) would also be instructive.

    Then a demonstration of the two systems: The scientists can predict and demonstrate while the religious types could show how their beliefs operate by praying a miracle into being.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by BambiB 11 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Personally, I don't think abortion is the biggest issue facing us today. I'd start with government corruption. I could probably list a dozen elected politicians who should be impeached, tried, convicted and HUNG!

    The second biggest problem is related to the first: The top-down power structure that has the Feral government making decisions for every community in the Nation. I see this as a direct (and indirect) result of the Supreme's decision in Wickard v. Filburn where they basically decided that every action that "affects" interstate commerce, regardless of how tangential or trivial the effect, is itself "interstate commerce" and subject to congressional control. Whether you have sex with your wife is, under this definition, "interstate commerce" because you may or may not have a child who will someday buy or sell or do something that will affect interstate commerce.

    To resolve a large portion of this Country's woes, the first step should be to hold politicians accountable (as in, "send the crooks to prison"). The second step should be to cut the Federal government back to its Constitutional roots - that is, slash its budget by 85%-95%. If a power is not explicitly granted by the Constitution, it is not a legitimate power of the Feral government.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by BambiB 11 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    While I generally agree with the overall sentiment of "Tea Partiers" (we have too much government), they seem to fit one definition of "fanatic", that being, "one who doubles their effort and loses sight of their goal".

    In truth, I am often surprised at how entire groups of people seem to forget what their goals are - and how easily sidetracked they are. There seems to be nowhere, except among the enemies of freedom - any single-minded drive towards... anything.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by BambiB 11 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Thanks for the heads up. Looks like an interesting read. We're lucky it was written by a women. Had it been written by a man, it would have been dismissed as "sexist".

    For another "sexist" read, check out "Weak Link". It's been out for a while, but it's a good assessment of why women do NOT belong in the military... which is topical due to the recent decision by the command structure to further endanger men in combat zones by burdening them with women.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by BambiB 11 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Alternatively, women know what they want (a free lunch) and no amount of marketing is going to get them to give it up. They're going to ride this Country all the way to the bottom - and when it crashes, they'll look around in surprise and say, "How can we be broke? There are still checks left in the checkbook!"
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by BambiB 11 years, 10 months ago
    kabir203: You're a fine example of the problem we face in America. Instead of engaging the FACTS, you present a non-sequiteur and take umbrage. Yes, of course I'm aware of the social trends you mention. Are you aware that women still cannot do math, physics or engineering? Look up the stats on THOSE fields and tell me why intellectually equivalent females would shun such rewarding and lucrative careers? (Hint: It's partly because men's brains and women's brains do not work the same.) Oooh! Sexism!!??

    Nope. Science. In fact the CEEB went to great lengths to gender-norm the CLEP exam for Physics and ultimately discovered they could get gender-normed answers - OR - they could test aptitude for doing physics. Not both. Interestingly, where problems called for rote application of a formula, or arithmetic computation, women actually surpassed men. Where they collapsed was in abstract reasoning, and advanced computation.

    And this is just a tiny sample of the differences.

    But quite beyond that, women are more risk averse than men. Look around at your fellow 14-year-olds. How many female skateboarders? In fact, pick a "risky" venture that you or your friends engage in and ask yourself... How many participants are female?

    Even at your age, the difference is apparent. But what it comes down to in later years is that women do not want to depend on themselves. They want to have someone to back them up. They want... government programs.

    There's another aspect in play - and you haven't been around long enough to see it happen - but for about the past 50 years, society has promoted women over men. There are scholarships, job opportunities, educational assistance programs that exists only for women. Men are discriminated against. Will we see that discrimination turn? Will men, now the minority in schools (as you've pointed out) and in home ownership now get government assistance for tuition, books, fees, scholarships and home ownership?

    Most men just want those programs to go away. But the women? No. The women (the majority) want them to stay. And so they shall... until the government collapses under their demands.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by BambiB 11 years, 10 months ago
    Jim Wright: You will eventually realize that your approach cannot work - not because it's not a good one, but because the average person in America is an idiot. No, seriously. Isn't the median IQ 100? How many people do you know below this level? (I daresay you know few of them, because you do not circulate in such company.) Point is, you are seriously - SERIOUSLY - overestimating the intelligence of the average American.

    Look at the last election. Even if they were completely duped the first time around - Obama AGAIN? If the average American had any brains at all, they would have elected Ron Paul in 2008 and he would be serving his second term now.

    So here's the problem: Pretend you're pitching your plan to a bunch of chimps. They'll listen to you for as long as you're handing out free bananas - then they'll laugh at you, clamp themselves on the ass and throw their shit at you.

    I don't think there's any chance of educating the average American anymore because so many now know things that just are not true. Even in this forum, I see charges of "sexism" when all I've done is present facts. Even here, people go off half-cocked, responding to things that were never said. What chance have you among the general population, a substantial portion of which only wants government handouts (and another group of which only wants to profit by providing those handouts via government contract)?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by BambiB 11 years, 10 months ago
    Dirty_Industrialist: If you're left speechless, it's likely because your reading comprehension is not up to snuff, or you were unaware of the facts. But given that you found the facts insulting, I'll go with the former.

    Try reading again. And don't give me that utopian bilge... in America, women are the largest group of government tit-suckers. Who do you think votes for "affirmative action" and welfare? Remember, it can't pass without a MAJORITY... and that's what women are - the majority. They started out in 1869 in Wyoming where women were first given the vote. They voted for more debt and more government. And they have... not... stopped.

    The women here in the gulch are decidedly in the minority among women. And "Amazed" lame excuses aside (as if men have so much more "time" than women) the truth is the reason men outnumber women more than 2:1 here is because women don't believe in freedom and self-sufficiency in anywhere near the same proportion as do men.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by eliastheartist 11 years, 10 months ago
    I signed up for the gulch months ago and just wandered in today. Just a few quick notes:

    Statistics are generally worthless and can be spun to mean everything and nothing.

    Stupid knows no race, sex or age and infects us all at some point in our life.

    Our civilization is collapsing and those who see it will be the ones who decide whether we fall into a dark age or rise into a golden age.

    And we will know pain, that is unavoidable now
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by BambiB 11 years, 10 months ago
    My comments are not merely addressed to the gulch stats. They address wider ranging facts. The majority of the Democratic Party member are... come on, anyone. Don't you know? Female. And the majority of Republicans are... come on, "Amazed", you can get this one. Men. Right.
    And which party has been the "social welfare" party? Need some time on that one? Ah, I'll just give it to you: Democrats.

    Now in case you missed it in my earlier comments, I've already pointed out that the gender gap is about 20%. But here's the bottom line: For every 10 women like "Amazed", there are 15 women who would sell your freedom in a New York second if they thought it would buy them more government programs.

    Another part of the problem "Amazed" is that when people are given the facts, they say something stupid like, "Please keep your sexist comments away from the gulch" instead of, "I didn't realize that most of society's problems arise because women are generally afraid of their own shadows and demand government intervention".
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by SierraRose 11 years, 10 months ago
    Ok, so this tells us who responded. Have you posted the responses?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by hybrazil 11 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Who said anything about altruism? Anyway, you're right in what you say, but I don't think you're hearing what AMAZED is saying to you. She's making a particular point.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by khalling 11 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I actually got the correct link. I am mulling discussing this issue from another angle(s). instead of pro life! pro choice! I would like to get down to why is it, a wealthy country like ours with families paying more money than any other country in the world for adopting babies still has the large number of abortions our country has. There are specific reasons for this. I'd like an intelligent discussion on those reasons.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Mimi 11 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I’m sorry but I deleted the link. I tried it again and the original story was gone and replaced with a story about ending racist abortions? I was not comfortable with the sudden hijacking of my link, by persons or websites unknown. It worked for about five minutes before the hijacking. Anyway, I’m old-school when it comes to personal decisions like abortion. It’s not anybody else's business. The Supreme ruled that they didn’t have the authority to force a woman to have a baby, because legally that could be interpreted to mean the federal government had the authority to take a way a woman’s ability to have a baby. Obviously, anyone who understands how important individual rights are has to be able to see how incredibly well decided Roe versus Wade was. I haven’t been to a Tea Party rally, but the ones around me are the big ones, like the one recently over the IRS scandal. I just don’t feel like jumping into the mix. I think George Kennan had the right of it when he talked about how a democracy will not last if the one government gets too big while the population grows exponentially. At some point we might break down then evolve into eight to ten governments like he speculated. It’s going to be a looog century.;)
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by dennyem 11 years, 10 months ago
    The one thing I didn't like on episodes 1 and 2 was having different actors/esses in each episode. I'm still waiting (im)patiently for episode 3 however.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by dirty_industrialist 11 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Hello OA...my remarks about condescension were not aimed at any general group (i.e. all pro-lifers), but at one poster above who was very much so. I would wholeheartedly agree that is a huge generallization, which I make every effort to avoid. I suppose that I must now prove myself to be so, but I am NOT a troll here. I am a very passionate and curious follower of this philosophy, and this story. It may just be the particular TPs I was exposed to, but in my personal experience, every one of them was also of fundamentalist christian persuasion, ergo, my assumption...however, I have learned since from other posters here that it is indeed NOT the case for all, which I do find encouraging as someone who likes the separation of church and state. :) Have a great weekend.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by ObjectiveAnalyst 11 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Greetings dirty_industrialist,

    We have a mixed bag here. All but some of the trolls value parts if not the whole philosophy; but few are truly doctrinaire. Some accept all except the abortion position and/or the atheism. We are generally glad to have them here regardless as they examine their premises they may or may not change their opinions; yet it is of benefit for all exposed to the discussion.

    The tea party is not monolithic either. The common thread is the desire for a limited government that does not take from the producers that which is their property.

    I do feel that some of your statements are generalizations. For instance, are all pro-life people condescending? I believe that would be most difficult to quantify and prove. Even if so, it would not be a convincing argument. It would be an ad-hominem/generalization and no more persuasive than condescension. Your comment regarding the tea partiers and their principles also leave me wondering. I see many who are pro-life, but I would call it a generalization to apply it as common principle or a “platform” of such a diverse group. Nor would I call them all racists because the MSM will go to great lengths to find the one idiot with an offensive sign to broadcast.

    If you expect everyone on this board to be doctrinaire, then this would indeed be a dull place to be since there would be no need for discussion. Everyone would think the same anyway. Some of us are still developing our philosophy while others are firm in our beliefs. Such is the nature of a public forum.

    Please keep expressing and supporting your positions with rational arguments and your argument will be won in the eyes of import.

    I have enjoyed the discussion.

    Respectfully,
    O.A.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by dirty_industrialist 11 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    thanks for the explanation of that. Unfortunate for me I guess, that I chose my time to infrequent-post, and a subject to post about, that made me look like a fly-by, a newbie or a Philosophy-by-last-movie-watched type. Not so. My husband and I are now on our third copy of AS, many of her philosophy books, and The Fountainhead as they've disintegrated from re-reads. :) I would agree that focusing on the economics./regulatory concerns of abortion may solve some of the "need"...but I would still contend that there are situations where it is not about money...(i.e. basically paying a woman, or making it worth her while economically, to continue to term) so that someone else can have the resultant baby instead of aborting the fetus. There are times when the health and/or very life of a woman is at stake if a pregnancy continues...and my entire belief in legal access to abortion is based on this very scenario. I too take life seriously and disdain irresponsible sexual activity. In my philosophy however...I believe that women (as well as men, but this is about a female issue) should have the choice on the state of their own health as a result of either continuing or aborting a pregnancy. Let's face it...rape and accidents happen, even to people who are responsible. Whether there is Obamacare or not ( I vote NOT). I see the freedom to determine the course of one's own health to be a pretty basic one that should never be interfered with by government. I would ask you then, because I cannot reconcile it in my head, how a person could espouse personal freedom and yet want to control the health decisions of another....which is maybe what I should have asked in the first place. That has always been my problem with a vocal (however small it may be) part of the political right in both the US and Canada...why does religious fundamentalism so often end up paired with fiscal responsibility and otherwise freedom-enhancing policies on their platforms? It doesn't make sense to me....and I think it alienates a lot of potential supporters, if we have to take fiscal responsibility wrapped in a bible. Ayn herself was an atheist, was she not...and objectivism and even agnosticism are incompatible if we embrace it fully... http://www.atlassociety.org/atheism-agno......
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo