According to the latest survey - more then 40% respond they are politically tilted to the right, and I wonder how many of the 30 some % in the middle are leaning to the starboard as well.
I find this really interseting. While any survey must be taken with a grain of salt, we should be able to assume that all who make participated in the survey are participants of the hobby in some form or another.
So, all of us are partaking in a hobby that is by law illegal in the vast majority of states. By nature not typical behavior of a conservative person. If we add the "immoral" stigma to this as well, even less likely behavior of the "typical conservative".
I know from past surveys that most of the respondants are white, middle aged, upper middle to upper class and educated folks. The income level makes sense as this is not a cheap hobby.
My point is, if the question were to be phrased differently - would the response still be the same?
There are many portions of politics - but if we boil them down to the two basics - fiscal and social - we could re word the question.
Where are your political views on Fiscal Policy - Very Right - Right - Middle - Left - Very Left
Followed by
Where are your political views on Social Policy - Very Right - Right - Middle - Left - Very Left.
For example - I would consider myself a fiscal conservative to moderate - while I am probably a social liberal to flaming liberal (don't take the word flaming in the wrong context here!!)
I believe we could do a better job with the taxes we collect - but we also legislate so much extra costs into our laws that we should be able to do much better with what the gov collects. I don't think we need new taxes.
However - I think the gov should stand up and help support new stadiums for the teams. It's hard to be considered a Major Metro area without sports teams as well as the arts. We do very well with the arts - notice the latest 25 million to the Gutherie. We did step up for the Wild - but not the twins and vikes. To me it gets to a quality of life issue. Major corps will not stay or relocate without a high quality of life.
Just me rambling here.....any other thoughts to this??
I would catagorize myself on the right side scale, but your point is well taken as to those taking the poll being the type that endorse both fiscal and social freedoms and lack of government control. This group usually calls themselves Libertarians.
I have never liked the attempt to define both the Left and the Right as advocating more government control in our lives. In reality, there is little difference between the total "Right Wing" (as in Nazis) and the Left Wing "People's Republics" of China and the former USSR. All are military dictatorships enslaving the vase majority of their citizens
Ayn Rand felt we should define Left as those advocating total government control of lives and Right as no government control at all (anarchy). Most Libertarians fall just inside of that,
then you go down the scale with those that believe, to one extent or another, that the government can do a better job running our lives than we can.
The stadium issue is a tough one...should private companies hold cities for ransom to increaase their profits? I'm all for helping out with specific voluntary taxes as long as the owners stop acting like spoiled children and put their own money on the line and it makes fiscal sense for the cities.
i think a great solution is to have communities buy the teams, like the PAckers. That would spread the risk amongst thousands and ensure that the team would stay there, as well as benefit the entire area.
Let's legalize prostitution and have any fees for that paid into the stadiums. Men think about sex, sports and money a lot of the day, so the blend would be a natural synergy.
-- Modified on 5/28/2003 8:42:32 PM
-- Modified on 5/28/2003 8:45:19 PM
-- Modified on 5/28/2003 8:46:00 PM
Check out South Dakota some time and look at all of the mid-size & major corps that have relocated from MN. Their quality of life is not near what ours is and the local sports scene takes second base to the simple fact(s) that the state supports them. Not financially, by simply getting the fuck out of the way. Lower income & property taxes, reasonable work comp etc...plus it is a right to work state. In the comps that I was looking at in the early 90's, the same scale manufacturing job paying $18/hr in the metro was paying $13.50 in Watertown, SD. Big difference right?, except for Joe sixpack wasn't getting 25% taken out of his check and his new F-150 license tabs were only $45 instead of $225. A 3 BR Split in Plymouth was $165k and in Watertown was $98K
Myself, I probably sit somewhere to the right of Steven Forbes on social & financial issues, however, my alter ego loves to dabble in this hobby. I still would not be in favor of legalized prostitution, but I wish LE would concern themselves with cleaning the walkers from the streets vs our fine ladies doing their thing in a discreet professional manner. Plus, they got a lot of bigger problems they should be dealing with also.
As far as those bastards that own the sports franchises, they have allowed this whole problem to evolve. I don't care what athlete you are talking about, he or she does not deserve to make 12,8 or even 2 million a year! They claim that they need this kind of compensation because their careers only last a short amount of time. Most people earning an hourly wage will not earn much a million dollars in their lifetime. And out of that they will pay over 40% to the government. Every gifted franchise athlete at the professional level has had the opportunity to a free or nearly free college education so their earning potential being capped by a narrow window of "playing time" is bullshit. It is sad when you take your family of 5 to a vikes game (or wolves) and it costs $200. But I guess that is where (subsidized) supply and demand make the rules.
a very thoughtful and needed post. i agree with the jist and just of what you wrote. this right ward swing this state has experienced is creepy and a cause for concern but i think it in its own way is a natural adjustment in the pendulum of politics. carry a gun, make another most unnecessary step toward gettin' an abortion for those in pain- that's what we are all about i guess... hypocrits but in an entirely predictable way... this hobby shouldn't be illegal should be taxed to benefit the whole but that will never happen. live on. so it goes. so it goes.