The Glade 4.0

"Turn the lights down, the party just got wilder."
It is currently Tue Nov 26, 2024 10:02 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 19 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Sat Mar 27, 2010 2:15 pm 
Offline
Not a F'n Boy Scout
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 12:10 pm
Posts: 5202
Vote Democrat, get money!

http://biggovernment.com/vderugy/2010/03/26/politics-democratic-stimulus-haul-is-almost-double-republicans/

Quote:
Politics: Democratic Stimulus Haul is Almost Double Republicans

by Veronique de Rugy

Yesterday The Hill reported that Speaker Nancy Pelosi said that “keeping a Democratic majority in the House is ‘too important to the country,’” which is why “she had no intention of ceding control of the House in this fall’s elections, despite Republican optimism that they can win control of the chamber.” Appearing on PBS, Pelosi addressed potential Democratic losses due to Sunday’s health care vote, “I’ve said if passing this bill means I have to walk out of my office that night, it would be with the greatest pride.” However, she cautioned, “I haven’t any intention of losing the Democratic majority.”

Sure. Here is another reason Mrs. Pelosi might want to keep a democratic majority. That’s because, as it turns out, based on my new analysis of the Recovery.org data, Democratic districts are getting 1.8 times more money on average than Republican districts. Using Recovery.gov data, and cleaning it up seriously to be able to use it, we find that Republican districts are getting on average $260.6 million in stimulus awards while democratic districts are getting on average $471.5 million. The average is award per district is $385.9 million.

Interestingly, my data also confirms that the stimulus funds are not allocated based on unemployment rates or even variations in unemployment rates. So basically, if the administration believes that government spending can create jobs, the allocation of the funds doesn’t show it.

_________________
Quote:
19 Yet she became more and more promiscuous as she recalled the days of her youth, when she was a prostitute in Egypt. 20 There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses.

Ezekiel 23:19-20 


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Mar 27, 2010 10:14 pm 
Offline
Peanut Gallery
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 9:40 pm
Posts: 2289
Location: Bat Country
Meh, aren't they both like this? It's not a Democrat problem, it's a this is how our government works problem.

_________________
"...the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart?" -Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Mar 27, 2010 11:50 pm 
Offline
Not a F'n Boy Scout
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 12:10 pm
Posts: 5202
Look at the size and scope of the spending...

_________________
Quote:
19 Yet she became more and more promiscuous as she recalled the days of her youth, when she was a prostitute in Egypt. 20 There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses.

Ezekiel 23:19-20 


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Mar 28, 2010 12:04 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:59 pm
Posts: 9412
While I'm sure that there's plenty of pork going around, I'm a bit underwhelmed by the reporting (or the study, I'm not sure which). Either the reporter hasn't been very clear, or the study didn't investigate and compare the spending on a population basis.

Denser population areas skew democratic, so I'm left wondering here how the spending per capita shakes out.

_________________
"Aaaah! Emotions are weird!" - Amdee
"... Mirrorshades prevent the forces of normalcy from realizing that one is crazed and possibly dangerous. They are the symbol of the sun-staring visionary, the biker, the rocker, the policeman, and similar outlaws." - Bruce Sterling, preface to Mirrorshades


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Sun Mar 28, 2010 12:06 am 
Offline
Not a F'n Boy Scout
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 12:10 pm
Posts: 5202
Kaffis Mark V wrote:
While I'm sure that there's plenty of pork going around, I'm a bit underwhelmed by the reporting (or the study, I'm not sure which). Either the reporter hasn't been very clear, or the study didn't investigate and compare the spending on a population basis.

Denser population areas skew democratic, so I'm left wondering here how the spending per capita shakes out.


I agree, which is why I posted in this forum, instead of New Coke.

As to the second, I think the last part of the OP is more relevant.

_________________
Quote:
19 Yet she became more and more promiscuous as she recalled the days of her youth, when she was a prostitute in Egypt. 20 There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses.

Ezekiel 23:19-20 


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Sun Mar 28, 2010 12:33 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:59 pm
Posts: 9412
Rynar wrote:
As to the second, I think the last part of the OP is more relevant.

Well, yes, if you want to somehow validate the crap claimed about the stimulus package creating jobs, I suppose. But we all know that's crap, so failing to link it to job creation doesn't immediately equal validation to claims that the bill is corruption at work, if instead of being linked to unemployment, it ends up being able to be shown to be linked to population count.

In other words, "your stimulus package spending distribution isn't linked to unemployment figures, therefore you're corrupt because it spends a lot in blue districts" gets defended with "we're not corrupt, it's spent in blue districts because that's where the population density is, so we're either merely incompetent (which you've been claiming all along anyways, so it's no skin off our nose to use it as a defense)." Thus, I would've liked to see more attention paid to refute that defense pre-emptively, as it were. Especially since I doubt anybody you'd accuse of the corruption will ever be forced to dignify it with an answer, when they've got a bunch of proxies in the media ready to make it on their behalf.

_________________
"Aaaah! Emotions are weird!" - Amdee
"... Mirrorshades prevent the forces of normalcy from realizing that one is crazed and possibly dangerous. They are the symbol of the sun-staring visionary, the biker, the rocker, the policeman, and similar outlaws." - Bruce Sterling, preface to Mirrorshades


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Mar 29, 2010 9:53 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 10:36 am
Posts: 3083
OP Article wrote:
...the stimulus funds are not allocated based on unemployment rates or even variations in unemployment rates. So basically, if the administration believes that government spending can create jobs, the allocation of the funds doesn’t show it.


De Rugy knows full well that stimulus funds were never supposed to be allocated based on local unemployment rates and that her conclusion doesn't remotely flow from the "data" she provides. It was a stimulus bill, not a jobs bill. The point was to stimulate aggregate demand in the economy as a whole, not provide some temporary jobs in specific places. De Rugy may not agree with the economic theory behind that idea, but she's fully aware of it, so this article is nothing more than a dishonest smear job intended to insinuate corruption without providing a single piece of actual evidence.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Mar 29, 2010 10:14 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 10:27 am
Posts: 2169
RangerDave wrote:
De Rugy knows full well that stimulus funds were never supposed to be allocated based on local unemployment rates and that her conclusion doesn't remotely flow from the "data" she provides. It was a stimulus bill, not a jobs bill. The point was to stimulate aggregate demand in the economy as a whole, not provide some temporary jobs in specific places.

Valid criticism RD. However, one could easily counter that the rhetoric used by the WH and the Democrats in defense of the two stimulus packages (one which was called a jobs bill), was very specific in linking the use of these funds as a job saving/creating measure. In my opinion, while I agree her evidence is lacking in terms of the conclusions she made (the graph is interesting, but doesn't address the multitude of factors that could influence the disparity), it is not unreasonable to take the links made by the WH and Congress to task.

Personally, I think a better case could be made looking at how the numbers in her chart are affected by earmarks in the bills, the Reps/Sens that added those earmarks and which districts benefits, then comparing that to the promises by Obama of eliminating such practices, vetoing bills that included such, etc. There is more than enough to hammer Obama over than such vague conclusions.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Mar 29, 2010 11:40 am 
Offline
pbp Hack
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 8:45 pm
Posts: 7585
Theoretically all congressional house districts should have equal or reasonably close to equal population, at least at the time the lines where drawn. So the per capita arguement kinda goes away.

_________________
I prefer to think of them as "Fighting evil in another dimension"


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Mar 29, 2010 12:18 pm 
Offline
Manchurian Mod
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 9:40 am
Posts: 5866
I would like to introduce you to my friend Jerry Mander.

_________________
Buckle your pants or they might fall down.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Mon Mar 29, 2010 8:16 pm 
Offline
Commence Primary Ignition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:59 am
Posts: 15740
Location: Combat Information Center
Rorinthas wrote:
Theoretically all congressional house districts should have equal or reasonably close to equal population, at least at the time the lines where drawn. So the per capita arguement kinda goes away.


Theoretically except that then you'd have districts that are either tiny or gargantuan in geographical terms.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Mar 30, 2010 2:45 pm 
Offline
Noli me calcare
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 10:26 am
Posts: 4747
You mean like the geographically tiny or gargantuan congressional districts we have? I direct your attention to the 4th Congressional district in Illinois (Chicago) and the single congressional district that is Montana.

Image

_________________
"Dress cops up as soldiers, give them military equipment, train them in military tactics, tell them they’re fighting a ‘war,’ and the consequences are predictable." —Radley Balko

Image


Last edited by Vindicarre on Tue Mar 30, 2010 3:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Mar 30, 2010 3:01 pm 
Offline
Commence Primary Ignition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:59 am
Posts: 15740
Location: Combat Information Center
If we based it strictly on population density it would be even worse than that. The only thing preventing it is the fact that each state gets at least one representative.

So yes, it depends what you mean by gargantuan. I would call Montana merely colossal. Alaska might qualify though. ;)

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Mar 30, 2010 3:05 pm 
Offline
Noli me calcare
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 10:26 am
Posts: 4747
Heheh

_________________
"Dress cops up as soldiers, give them military equipment, train them in military tactics, tell them they’re fighting a ‘war,’ and the consequences are predictable." —Radley Balko

Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Apr 01, 2010 6:10 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 10:36 am
Posts: 3083
Well, it looks like de Rugy's analysis in the OP was *ahem* not particularly thorough:

The study does not control for at least one other variable that is overwhelmingly important in determining the dispensation of stimulus funds. The variable in question is in fact pretty obvious if you simply look at the districts that have received the largest amount of stimulus money, according to de Rugy's dataset.

The district that received the largest amount of stimulus funding in the 4th Quarter of 2009, according to de Rugy's tally, is California's 5th Congressional District. Is there anything notable about the 5th Congressional? Well, it is home to the state capital, Sacramento....Next on the list is New York's 21st Congressional District. The largest city in the 21st is the state capital of New York, Albany. Third is the 21st Congressional District of Texas. It contains parts of Texas' state capital, the wonderful city of Austin. (Another district that contains parts of Austin -- the 25th -- ranks 14th on de Rugy's list.)

...etc...

This, of course, makes perfect sense. A lot of stimulus funds are distributed to state agencies, which are then responsible for allocating and administering the funds to the presumed benefit of citizens throughout the state. These state agencies, of course, are usually located in or near the state capital. In fact, the differences are pretty overwhelming....On a per-district basis, the districts with state capitals received 11 times more funding.

...The other piece of the puzzle, of course, is that state capitals are much more likely to elect Democrats to Congress for a variety of reasons. They are, by definition, urban (although some smaller state capitals like Montpelier stretch the definition). They are, by definition, home to large numbers of governmental employees, who may be more sympathetic to bigger government. They tend to be highly educated and often are home to large state universities.

That de Rugy has testified before Congress on the basis of her evidence, and never paused to consider why the top five congressional districts on her list overlap with Sacramento, Albany, Austin, Tallahassee and Harrisburg, is mind-boggling. The presence of a state capital is the overwhelmingly dominant factor it predicting the dispensation of stimulus funds.


Actually, it's not that mind-boggling. It's called partisan hackery.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Apr 01, 2010 7:20 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:59 pm
Posts: 9412
So, wait. "highly educated" = "elects Democrats to Congress"? Source, please. Because your Nate Silver is, by contrast, calling Republicans stupid (or, if you prefer, uneducated). And for a party whose supporters are known to include a significant majority of urban poor and unionized blue collar types, both of which would seem to pull the "educated" average down, making a claim like that (especially while, in the same breath, pointing out urban areas vote Democrat) without source is.. stretching my credulity.

That's not to discount most of the rest of it, but.. that's a lot of slander, there, to put your opponent's backs up and undermine your valid points, there, Nate.

_________________
"Aaaah! Emotions are weird!" - Amdee
"... Mirrorshades prevent the forces of normalcy from realizing that one is crazed and possibly dangerous. They are the symbol of the sun-staring visionary, the biker, the rocker, the policeman, and similar outlaws." - Bruce Sterling, preface to Mirrorshades


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Thu Apr 01, 2010 8:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 10:36 am
Posts: 3083
Kaffis Mark V wrote:
So, wait. "highly educated" = "elects Democrats to Congress"? ...And for a party whose supporters are known to include a significant majority of urban poor and unionized blue collar types, both of which would seem to pull the "educated" average down


I don't think he's saying that Dem voters are more educated on average; just that "highly educated" people in particular tend to vote Dem. I'd have to do some digging to find specific sources, but if memory serves, Dems have a meaningful advantage among voters at both extremes of the education spectrum (i.e. among people who didn't finish high school and among people with post-graduate degrees), while folks in the middle (high school grads, people with some college, and people with college degrees) are pretty evenly split between the parties.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 02, 2010 6:54 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2010 11:59 am
Posts: 3879
Location: 63368
The latest authoritative figures I could find were on the Census.gov web site from a 1994 report by the FEC.

www.census.gov/prod/1/gen/95statab/election.pdf

_________________
In time, this too shall pass.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 02, 2010 6:13 pm 
Offline
Not a F'n Boy Scout
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 12:10 pm
Posts: 5202
MENSA, who's only requirement for membership is an IQ in the top 2%, is overwhelmingly libertarian.

_________________
Quote:
19 Yet she became more and more promiscuous as she recalled the days of her youth, when she was a prostitute in Egypt. 20 There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses.

Ezekiel 23:19-20 


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 19 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 59 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group