Illinois......are you staying or leaving? (Lee: crimes, loan, colleges)

[IrishIllini]

Originally Posted by EddieOlSkool

Honestly if Illinois residents leave because they don't like the liberal culture, I commend them for doing so. Go move to Red States where you fit in. Meanwhile Illinois can become more like Wisconsin and Minnesota as the more liberal Midwestern people leave Indiana and Missouri. Maybe then then the state can go in a more progressive direction which is horribly needed. How do you think we got Rahm? Illinois has been full of people OK with the status quo for too long. Maybe those people do need to leave.

I wouldn't mind a dark Blue Illinois. It is solid Blue now and I would like it dark Blue. All of the states I find desirable are dark Blue like California, Massachusetts, Vermont, Maine, Oregon, and Washington.

As low income people leave and higher earners come in, we increase our tax base. I always did envy New England.

What? Wisconsin and Minnesota deep blue? Wisconsin voted for Trump and Minnesota barely went for Clinton. Illinois is by far the bluest state in the Midwest.

The demographic transition is interesting. Most of the people leaving for red states are actually the ones who benefit most from Illinois' social safety nets, but that's whatever. If you can't find a job I understand why you'd move. Leaves us with more money for pensions, I guess

[EddieOlSkool]

Originally Posted by IrishIllini

What? Wisconsin and Minnesota deep blue? Wisconsin voted for Trump and Minnesota barely went for Clinton. Illinois is by far the bluest state in the Midwest.

The demographic transition is interesting. Most of the people leaving for red states are actually the ones who benefit most from Illinois' social safety nets, but that's whatever. If you can't find a job I understand why you'd move. Leaves us with more money for pensions, I guess

Historically Wisconsin and Minnesota have had more blue counties than Illinois and especially blue rural counties (White majority) which has rarely if ever been a part of Illinois's history and culture. Downstate has historically been Red in the rural areas. Wisconsin and Minnesota have historically had Blue rural counties.

So yes WI and MN have historically been more democrat leaning than Illinois. The Scandinavian Lutherans are a cause of this. Actually the progressive movement was born in Wisconsin. It had always been possible to find Democrat voters in the rural Upper Midwest. So that alone tells you how much more Blue those states have historically been. Outside of Montana, Idaho, and North Dakota the rule is the closer you get to Canada, the less Republican it is.

Wisconsin also has voted Blue without failure every past election since the 1980s. Same with Minnesota.

[IrishIllini]

Originally Posted by EddieOlSkool

Historically Wisconsin and Minnesota have had more blue counties than Illinois and especially blue rural counties (White majority) which has rarely if ever been a part of Illinois's history and culture. Downstate has historically been Red in the rural areas. Wisconsin and Minnesota have historically had Blue rural counties.

So yes WI and MN have historically been more democrat leaning than Illinois. The Scandinavian Lutherans are a cause of this. Actually the progressive movement was born in Wisconsin. It had always been possible to find Democrat voters in the rural Upper Midwest. So that alone tells you how much more Blue those states have historically been. Outside of Montana, Idaho, and North Dakota the rule is the closer you get to Canada, the less Republican it is.

Wisconsin also has voted Blue without failure every past election since the 1980s. Same with Minnesota.

As has Illinois, but I understand what you're saying. Downstate has a considerable amount of red, but it's just so much less populated there's no hope of Illinois ever going red. Rural Wisconsin (and Wisconsin in general) tends to be more homogeneous than Illinois. Same goes for Minnesota. When people see people who look like them receiving assistance, they're less likely to take issue with it. It's when brown people get assistance that people get up in arms about state-provided social services. It's the we don't want to pay for them mentality. AKA racism.

[Mathguy]

Originally Posted by IrishIllini

As has Illinois, but I understand what you're saying. Downstate has a considerable amount of red, but it's just so much less populated there's no hope of Illinois ever going red. Rural Wisconsin (and Wisconsin in general) tends to be more homogeneous than Illinois. Same goes for Minnesota. When people see people who look like them receiving assistance, they're less likely to take issue with it. It's when brown people get assistance that people get up in arms about state-provided social services. It's the we don't want to pay for them mentality. AKA racism.

Not sure where that came from all of the sudden but my father, a long time republican in rural Illinois, always complained about social services because of a couple of our own relatives that were milking it and not any racial stuff. He had a cousin that was a life-long spoiled deadbeat.

That's a pretty broad accusation to throw around that people that have issues with the extent of social services do so out of racism.

[jvr789]

Originally Posted by IrishIllini

As has Illinois, but I understand what you're saying. Downstate has a considerable amount of red, but it's just so much less populated there's no hope of Illinois ever going red. Rural Wisconsin (and Wisconsin in general) tends to be more homogeneous than Illinois. Same goes for Minnesota. When people see people who look like them receiving assistance, they're less likely to take issue with it. It's when brown people get assistance that people get up in arms about state-provided social services. It's the we don't want to pay for them mentality. AKA racism.

Seriously? Wow. For what it is worth I had a couple of friends who were let go during the Great Recession(2009) due to mass lay-offs and these well-paid, educated people literally told me that they were taking the unemployment benefits until they ran out instead of sincerely looking for a job because they "needed a break".


Meanwhile, I was pulling 60 hours a week and working weekends to meet deadlines and paying taxes to fund these "unemployment" benefits. It really pissed me off and still does. These people are my peers and look like me. Of course when the benefits ran out, said people found jobs very quickly.

[FAReastcoast]

Originally Posted by IrishIllini

As has Illinois, but I understand what you're saying. Downstate has a considerable amount of red, but it's just so much less populated there's no hope of Illinois ever going red. Rural Wisconsin (and Wisconsin in general) tends to be more homogeneous than Illinois. Same goes for Minnesota. When people see people who look like them receiving assistance, they're less likely to take issue with it. It's when brown people get assistance that people get up in arms about state-provided social services. It's the we don't want to pay for them mentality. AKA racism.

Oh come on now, I doubt the average person is ok with a white person receiving benefits and not a minority. Me personally, I believe unless you are disabled or elderly you should be working. Get a job. We've given too much of the population the ability to not work. I think the bigger issue is classism, not racism. It's just that the vast majority of people in Chicago receiving entitlements, committing violent crimes, not making ends meet happen to be minorities, so it's easy to just call it racism.

[IrishIllini]

Originally Posted by Mathguy

Not sure where that came from all of the sudden but my father, a long time republican in rural Illinois, always complained about social services because of a couple of our own relatives that were milking it and not any racial stuff. He had a cousin that was a life-long spoiled deadbeat.

That's a pretty broad accusation to throw around that people that have issues with the extent of social services do so out of racism.

I can see why you thought I meant everyone who is against social safety-nets would think that way, but that's not what I meant to imply. Obviously there are bad apples who will abuse the system, but most people have literally no other choices. I also don't get too worked up about those who do abuse the system. Chances are they would lead significantly better lives working, which is why most do in fact return to the workforce. For most it's either they receive government aid or they're homeless, which leads to even more severe public health issues.

The types of people I'm describing are the people who largely voted for Trump. I DON'T WANT PEOPLE ON FOOD STAMPS BECAUSE TAXES, BUT DON'T TOUCH MY SOCIAL SECURITY!!! They'll also preach against Obamacare and then get defensive about their Medicaid. It's the insane hypocrisy that the GOP has devolved into (has always been?) that I'm talking about. Many of them only hate these programs because they are perceived handouts to poor minorities. The GOP manipulates scores of white working class voters into voting R because they're brainwashed into believing that they too will be rich eventually and they won't want their taxes going up! The truth of the matter is the largest share of public-aid recipients are white Americans. . Most will never come close to having any real sort of wealth, but they're played for fools by those with deep pockets and fancy degrees that mommy & daddy paid for with their family's trust.

[EddieOlSkool]

I think the reason many Illinois residents hate what they call "entitlements" is because they actually believe that poor people are poor because of what they perceive to be "socialist" Democratic policies. They don't realize that simply putting the blame on the government is a copout.

[MSchemist80]

I believe some of the poor are poor through no fault of their own. Being a chemist and seeing the absolute cluster F that is hiring and how tough a job search is and how devoid of merit hiring is I would never blame someone for having trouble finding work. There are also people with physical and mental issues.

There are also a lot more people that made bad decisions. They majored in worthless subjects, committed crimes, got substance abuse issues, had kids they were not financially able to support, dropped out of High School etc.

However, looking forward to the future I just see living wage jobs being available for a smaller and smaller portion of the population and income inequality and hyperinflation of education and medical and any other vital services continuing. Therefore, I think we are either going to have to have a guaranteed min income to ensure our people get their minimal needs taken care of or we are going to have rampant poverty and the societal issues that accompany it. At this point with the complicated and inefficient web of social welfare programs and the high cost of incarceration it probably wouldn't cost much more than we are spending now.

[IrishIllini]

Originally Posted by MSchemist80

I believe some of the poor are poor through no fault of their own. Being a chemist and seeing the absolute cluster F that is hiring and how tough a job search is and how devoid of merit hiring is I would never blame someone for having trouble finding work. There are also people with physical and mental issues.

There are also a lot more people that made bad decisions. They majored in worthless subjects, committed crimes, got substance abuse issues, had kids they were not financially able to support, dropped out of High School etc.

However, looking forward to the future I just see living wage jobs being available for a smaller and smaller portion of the population and income inequality and hyperinflation of education and medical and any other vital services continuing. Therefore, I think we are either going to have to have a guaranteed min income to ensure our people get their minimal needs taken care of or we are going to have rampant poverty and the societal issues that accompany it. At this point with the complicated and inefficient web of social welfare programs and the high cost of incarceration it probably wouldn't cost much more than we are spending now.

I agree.