Quote:
Originally Posted by KSigkid
I'm not on Jindal for President bandwagon, only because I've been on the Romney for President bandwagon for a while. I like Jindal though quite a bit.
For me, there are a few reasons why I prefer Jindal to Palin, but one of the most basic is that I think Jindal's just smarter. For me, one of the big issues is that I want someone at that level to be incredibly smart. It's not the whole ball of wax (for example, Obama's incredibly smart but I don't agree with his policies), but it's part of the equation for me.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Munchkin03
I find Bobby Jindal to be considerably more qualified, educated, and intelligent than Mrs. Palin. Even though I don't agree with all of his political-personal viewpoints, I believe that he can govern efficiently. Not so much with Miss Wasilla.
|
Jindal is better educated certainly. Some of the right wing sites that are also strong pro-evolution would have you believe that he's done a lot to advance a Creationist agenda in science ed, for whatever that's worth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Munchkin03
|
I didn't doubt the overall take that some states get back far more than they pay in, but I was interested in exactly what was accounted for. South Caroline as a welfare state was kind of a new idea.
Sometimes, I think that the relatively small size of a state's tax base skews the numbers quite a bit.(Or large size in the case of New York, in the opposite direction.) I'd kind of assume that there's a baseline amount of federal funds you'd expect every state to get. There'd be more funds coming in if that state had more military bases and this could heavily tip a state with a relatively low population overall. I'm interested in trying to see where money goes and if it's high or low per capita compared to other states.