yeah, that’s an ongoing problem here, but the cost of leaving those comments up is a never ending stream of ‘me too’ punchers, which invariably derail and detract from the post and also isn’t much fun to read. which is the goal of the dissembler in the first place.
So I’m pretty happy about it, imperfections and all. You can usually ask and someone will give you a summary 9 times out of 10.
This is a good primer (I feel anyways).
Could you characterize what you did there, the thing that bothered someone as just asking questions? I ask, because that’s the rub. Someone else easily can, and that’s easily avoidable if you want. If you don’t know that’s the rub, please take this moment to take it on board. There’s no ‘right way’ to talk, but there are a few tired old tropes, and ‘observations’ are one of them. Only you know what you meant.
At the point a robot can impregnate women, things will have gone to Hell in a hand basket!
(IVF, you say? Well, look around. Have things gone to Hell in a hand basket yet?) 
I was thinking more along the lines of “forcibly disenfranchised,” with the 'bots being the army keeping martial law, al la Handmaid’s Tale. But that works too.
If you reduce your income and spend the same or more, you run up more debt.
The difference is democracy. Venezuela is a dictatorship which in of itself makes it more rife with corruption and waste than a democracy which has oversight of government officials as a matter of course.
Dictatorships produce lousy quality of life whether they be capitalist or socialist.
Democracies which have socialist policies produce higher quality of life than those which do not.
Powdermilk Biscuits 
False equivalence. All countries with social programs are not necessarily “socialist” even if someone right wing thinks they are. You may as well say Sweden and the Soviet Union were the same. There are a lot of reasons why some countries fail and others succeed, and corruption can spread in any ideology.
(I’m giving you a pass on what others here think is a racist “dog whistle” because I’m hoping you didn’t mean it that way, but you should realize that’s sure what it sounded like.)
Speaking purely anecdotally (so season to taste) I know Kentuckians who have deep resentment over more recent history: the loss of the Civil War. If they’d let that go instead of pretending to be martyrs to an ignoble cause perhaps then they could make some progress.
Accepting refugees and the economic stimulation they engender?
No experiment is ever sufficient to a Republican. Every time they fail, it reminds me of the hardline Communists in Russia who say Communism wasn’t given enough time, or that the USSR implemented it incorrectly.
What’s that? You cut taxes and your economy is a disaster? Cut taxes even more! These are just growing pains. Of course it’s going to get worse before it gets better.
Just be careful though, he won’t be looking for the effect on the homeless, the poor, or even the middle class. The only metric for success is: do the upper-upper class [the Governor’s, and what should be everyone else’s, aspirational class] have a higher net income than they would have in the previous system?
And even if, for some reason, he does need to raise revenue directly, it will always be with a consumption tax. Because, “that’s the only fair tax, right?! It affects everyone equally.”
Always remember: an income tax is tyranny; a graduated income tax is tyranny and class warfare!
Sure, lots of people say the same thing. It works there but it won’t work here. It works in Minnesota but it wouldn’t work in Kansas. Single payer health care costs less and delivers better results in every other developed nation but it wouldn’t in America.
In economics we’ll never have properly controlled experiments, so people will always be able to cling to ideology in the face of any amount of evidence.
What evidence do we have this this is the case, other than just assuming racism is a default human trait? Cities tend to have far more diversity and be home to far more immigrants than rural areas, but cities are consistently more progressive than rural areas. There’s absolutely no reason to think that diversity reduces willingness to share. Maybe human intuition is to recognize other humans as humans and racism is a learned construct.
You aren’t pointing this out you are asserting it. You say it’s “pretty clear” the two are linked, later you say there is a strong correlation. I don’t believe this is true. I’ve Googled it myself and found right-wing National Review having an article confirming your point and using as evidence a bunch of studies showing that Americans are racist against black people (which doesn’t prove anything) and an at least equally compelling article on Vox saying the opposite. I found this graph that shows next-to-zero correlation (on a set of datapoints so small you’d need a massive correlation to even consider it):
From this paper that concludes:
Our initial question was whether increasing social heterogeneity would negatively
influence public opinion on the welfare state and thus undermine its legitimacy. By analyzing
data from the ESS, we have been able to demonstrate in both bivariate and multivariate
analyses that this correlation is not as clear as often assumed.
What evidence to you rely on to think that there is a meaningful correlation? What evidence do you rely on to suggest that this meaningful correlation is actually a cause?
Of course, while I believe wholeheartedly that “democracy is the worst form of Government except all those other forms that have been tried,” I think the effect you’re referring to is the Mixed Economy.
It’s mostly attributed to capitalist economies that mix in social programs to fill the gaps where profit motives fail to produce the best results (like life and death).
However, it can even be applied to communist nations that dabbled in capitalism. China, for example, is thriving on a mix of communist rule sprinkled with a capitalist economy. And Stalin’s atrocity of starving the Ukrainian people was actually caused by taking away its mixed economy (the farmers there were no longer allowed to profit on their crops) and going pure communist.
It’s important to know this because China shows you don’t necessarily have to have a democracy to have a strong economy. I think it’s instilled a willingness in some of America’s elite to tear down democratic institutions. However, without programs to assist the people enrich their lives, going pure capitalist is surely going to end in an atrocity all its own.
The problem is people like Ryan who are large and in charge atm see cuts (services and taxes) and get “excited.” Then they see the deficits they create and get fucking horny for the opportunity to be “forced” to cut more services in order to be “responsible.” The point of all of it is to create budgetary crises so they can say “see we can’t afford it. Government can’t compare to private sector. Etc etc.”
a rather unbalanced diet
Since 1980 or so, it seems that the definition of a Republican is someone who:
Insists that government can’t do anything right
Wants to be put in charge of the government
Once elected, throws sand in the gears and does everything possible to prove #1
All of this is done while insisting that our nation is teetering on the brink of ruin (e.g. Jan 20,2009 - Jan 19, 2017)
Possibly, but I think education correlates more factually than resentment. Probably reduces it too. I don’t resent having to have had to do that to them, but lots of guys from my town went, kicked ass, and many came home. I don’t hold a grudge on their behalf. But I’m at least somewhat educated.
The problem we see is China’s economy is opaque. We really don’t know how well they are really thriving. As a closed society we only see evidence around the edges of what looks like potential economic trouble. Stories of ghost towns due to over construction, an exodus of rich oligarchs with their funds which is fueling housing prices here, rampant corruption, and huge income disparities based on region. For the most part the average Chinese person lives on a far lower standard of living than many smaller countries in Asia which are democratic. The per capita income of Taiwanese is 6x that of Mainland China.
Dictatorships waste resources by their nature. Lack of accountability introduces corruption into all aspects of the economy. This is true of both communist and capitalist based dictatorships.
