And the Survey SAYS...
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
- - -
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
- - -
Previous comments... You are currently on page 3.
I can find you 5 different references to how Rome fell apart. The upshot is clear. de tocqueville said it long before women had the vote, based on historical precedent, as soon as people figured out they could vote in people who would give them feebies, instead of working for it, the american experiment would die.
The site is promoting Ron Paul, and sees history in that light. That doesn't mean that it is in-factual, but it does mean that a great deal of other information is excluded if it is of no benefit to the 'cause'. In short: it is biased, and has it's agenda.
I'm happy to have had my say on this, and we just agree to not agree.
wait a minute, why is the onus on me? what are YOU providing. I am amazed that I have even stayed in this nonsensical conversation(let's take the vote away from women) as long as I have. give me a point!
But you are looking at a symptom, not a cause.
Easily done, so you are in good company!
The Roman military expenditures to maintain it's empire broke the camel's back, and bankrupted the economy. Bread and circuses were employed to mask the growing deficit, not unlike the 99 week unemployment benefit, manipulated Wall Street results, SS disability giveaways, food stamps, etc. are being used today.
I am all for saying that Rome used welfare to quell the masses, but stand by my understanding of the Roman Empire to repeat that their global expansion, and subsequent overwhelming military costs, both brought this upon them, and brought them ultimately down.
http://www.landthieves.com/board/showthr...
What I submit to be the reason for Rome's collapse was their insatiable desire for expansion. And Rome's inability to finance this expansion on the backs of the Roman citizens.
There was no world economy, or International Monetary Fund, to underwrite this addiction...all they could do was to conquer, then plunder through taxation of the conquered. This had a short success, but the real 'books' showed a negative return. The cost of maintaining the Roman Empire was the death knoll, or death rattle, if you prefer.
Over achievement is the culprit here...not social programs.
Did ancient Rome run a similar debt? Did Rome borrow a third of its budget from other countries (as we do from China)?
If you are, I say, "show me".
Get that?
As counter-argument do you SERIOUSLY believe there are no cultural or economic differences between German women in WWI Germany and American women in post-WWII America? Or that women in 1 BC, had the same concerns as American women in 1920? They don't share a common geography, language, history, culture... anything but the second X chromosome, and yet you GENERALIZE that they are all the same?? Is yours a serious argument? Or are you just trolling?
If you can demonstrate that women were the same 2000 years ago in Rome as they are today, perhaps you have a point. If you can demonstrate that the motivations in Germany (all at one time) were the same as women in America (over a period of 50 years, in 48 states and the Feral government) MAYBE you have a point.
But you cannot LOGICALLY claim one is just like the other without establishing that it is so. In the examples the study author cites, he is drawing conclusions from 48 states of the USA, plus the Federal government regarding the effect of voting by AMERICAN women, effectively presenting dozens of cases (because women got the vote at different times) that prove his thesis.
You have presented... well... nothing.
In fact, the book I just read has the current generation of American men offering the advice, "Don't marry an American woman." Having travelled in 20+ foreign countries, I'm prone to agree because, on average, I don't believe American women offer nearly as much as women who have grown up in other cultures. That's not to say there are NO good American women - but the general trend is... well, do your own research.
The problem with citing "other factors" is that American women got the vote over a period of 50 years. What other factor didn't exist before the first women got the vote, didn't exist in any state where women did not have the vote, manifested itself when women got the vote (in every case) and has persisted to this day? Can you cite ANY factor that meets that criteria? If you can, this could get to be a REALLY interesting conversation!! If not, then the study's conclusion remains the best available: The women's vote is responsible for the economic destruction of America.
Why are men at fault?
They let women vote.
I have already discussed that throughout history there have been governments whose demise was due to welfare policies, such as Rome. You never commented on that.
finally, regarding "rules," in your argument, women are grouped and then uniformly blamed. IChanging the argument from overall trends to a rule. Once a rule, all I have to do is show that women in a state who made up more than the median population does not fit the rule. This might lead to looking at other factors as a driving cause.
Load more comments...