Good morning.
- Ammunition for the (faulty) recession meme.
- Coptic Christian art collection.
- Better (big) battery?
- On anti-semitism and America.
- Mr Obama (and liberals) on race.
- Power, extra-crispy, or KFC in Fallujah.
- A thing to say (and do). A related post.
- The biblical studies carnival.
- Demonstration of bias against the indigenous native American population.
- The “detached lever” fallacy.
- Apologetics and St. Vladimir.
- Single payer.
- If playing in the trenches in an NFL game isn’t torture, then nothing is torture … or something like that.
- Biology question. (Answer at the link)
That’s a new one on me: It’s anti-Native American (wha?) to mock folks lamenting the end of massive corruption in their state?
Me thinks that the Native American community (who, er, are not synonymous with “Alaskan”) would not be exactly thrilled with your defense.
David,
No. You claimed the problem of Alaskan budget problems to be one related to pork and corruption, as opposed to other matters, and had no substantiating evidence for your allegations.
Alaska is between (depending on which googled demographic source you choose) 15-20% AIAN (Alaskan Indian or Alaskan Native). 4 counties are listed as “persistent poverty counties”, which means they’ve had greater than 20% unemployment from 1970 until now. Those counties are do have significant overlap with those counties which are greater than 50% AIAN oddly enough and some of those counties the primary employment is from government jobs, which you claim as all “pork”.
What percentage of that spending is “corruption-tainted pork” and how much of that outlay of government largess actually is getting to those who, it might be argued, need it?
Examine this document for example. Do you think the high government outlay per capita has nothing to do with integrating and finding a way for a healthier AIAN population? Is that going to require money?