Happy? You're probably a Republican

[Haggis@wk]

Happy? You’re probably a Republican

”One of the things tracked by the Pew Research Center is happiness. Since the 1970s, the Pew pollsters have been asking Americans how happy they are and analyzing the results. This year's survey came out on Monday, and, as always, it shows that Republicans, on the average, are happier than Democrats:

Some 45% of all Republicans report being very happy, compared with just 30% of Democrats and 29% of independents. This finding has also been around a long time; Republicans have been happier than Democrats every year since the General Social Survey began taking its measurements in 1972.”

The gap between Republicans and Democrats persists when factors like income and marital status (both powerful predictors of happiness) are accounted for.

Conservatives, likewise, are happier people than liberals, and churchgoers are happier than non-churchgoers.

It’s been my experience for years that the people I’ve always assumed as being liberals or Democrats seem gloomier than me or my friends. Republican/conservatives also seem to be more optomistic about the future.

[Shapley]

Haggis,

Predictably, these statistics will make Republicans happy, and will be a source of distress (or evidence of a conspiracy) to Democrats.

V/R
Shapley

[shostakovich]

Contentment is approximately proportional to wealth. Republicans are more concerned with comfortable wealth than others. So the results are pretty predictable. This is not to say that Republicans are necessarily devoid of concern for others. I'm willing to bet there actually are some "compassionate conservatives". I hope to meet one sometime.
Less than Ecstatic, but with Lotsa Heart, Shos

[Shapley]

Shos,

I read an article on this over the weekend that says that Republicans are happier than Democrats throughout all income ranges. Even poor Republicans are happier than poor Democrats.

V/R
Shapley

[Shapley]

My own view of this is that Republicans are more willing than Democrats to accept the challenges brought about by changing economic and political climates.

Global warming, for instance, scares Democrats but not Republicans. Why? Democrats fear that global warming will bring about catastrophic changes that may imperil our ability to live on the Earth. Republicans believe that changes due to global warming, if they occur, will occur gradually, allowing people time to adjust to, or resolve, the problems incountered.

Democrats worry too much about other people's problems, as well as other people's good fortune. They see injustice in every aspect of life, and try to find governmental solutions to fix it. Republicans see that there is injustice in many aspects of life, and accept that that is the way of the world. They are willing to allow government to fix such injustice as falls within their jurisdiction, but believe that not everything in life falls within that jurisdiction.

Democrats think they pay too much in taxes, and that everybody else doesn't pay enough in taxes. They spend a lot of time worrying about that. They think that government could do a better job of curing all our ills if everybody else would give enough money to the treasury. Republicans think everybody that pays taxes probably pays too much in taxes, because the government tries to do too much with what it has, and wastes a lot of money in the process of trying to do it.

V/R
Shapley

[Selma in Sandy Eggo]

Originally posted by shostakovich:
... I'm willing to bet there actually are some "compassionate conservatives". I hope to meet one sometime...

Perhaps we have the dividing trait here.

Perhaps the conservative church-attending bunch, likelier to register Republican, are the ones who feel optimistic about their ability to earn a good life, and who also expect that everyone else has a decent chance to earn a good life. These folks would naturally feel favorable to policies that enhance their ability to keep what they earn, and unfavorable to policies that give unearned benefits to others.

The other bunch might be composed of the natural pessimists who doubt that their lives will be, or will remain, good; and who also do not feel hopeful about the ability of others to do for themselves. This pessimism might naturally predispose them to favor enforcing greater social controls and benefits.

Are we allowed to hand out antidepressants and see what happens? I'll admit to being an essential optimist; I have this bone-deep conviction that things will eventually turn out all right. I just have to keep on pluggin' along.

[OperaTenor]

Wow Shap, too much Kool-Aid, IMNSHO.
Your characterization of Democrats(or liberals - let's just drop the partisan labels) couldn't be any less wrong than your characterization of most neocons I know. Let's take me, for example. Contrary to your description, I feel I have a miraculously good life, and I'm lucky to have grown up in the most prosperous, liberal(I believe that would be the term for a society focused on liberty) society on earth.

The implication that liberals are selfish and hypocritical would do Sean Hannity proud. I don't know, or have ever heard of, a single liberal who would exclude themselves from the responsibility of contributing to the greater good FOR ALL.

The real reason most neocons aren't troubled by the need to stem global warming or protect the environment is they could care less about them, especially if they stand in the way of their quest for the almighty short-term dollar. There is even a cadre of your fanatical fundamentalist right wing brethren out there who believe it's God's will that they rape the environment for all it's worth, especially as they won't be around to deal with the consequences, or so they believe.

As for neocons more readily facing growing economic and political challenges; really? Is that why, when GWB couldn't(or wouldn't) capture UBL, he chose to take a path of less resistance and invade Iraq? Is that why GWB buckled to public opinion and dropped promotion of his Social Security stock market giveaway?

<small>[ 02-27-2006, 06:58 PM: Message edited by: OperaTenor ]</small>

[shostakovich]

Even poor Republicans are happier than poor Democrats.

Hi Shap. I suspect the lowest percentile (regarding income) of Democrats are poorer than their Republican counterparts. I could be wrong in this guess. I've been wrong before. I also wonder how many of the poorest in this country have bothered to register with a party.

And this comment: "Global warming, for instance, scares Democrats but not Republicans. Why? Democrats fear that global warming will bring about catastrophic changes that may imperil our ability to live on the Earth. Republicans believe that changes due to global warming, if they occur, will occur gradually, allowing people time to adjust to, or resolve, the problems incountered." sounds like: "Not to worry. God will provide".

Since (I assume) more Republicans have deep religious convictions than have Democrats, the Dems want people --- even the government --- to take action. And we can agree depending on the government is a worrisome proposition.

Anyway, I'm not countering your positions, but just viewing them differently.


------------------------------------------------------
And Selma sez:
"I'll admit to being an essential optimist; I have this bone-deep conviction that things will eventually turn out all right. I just have to keep on pluggin' along."

Optimism of the bones ------------- Hmmmmm. That's bad. See your friendly osteopath. Mine cured me years ago.
Shos

[Shapley]

OT,

I don't think I've called Democrats selfish or hypocritical. I live in a heavily Democratic area. The Democrats there are constantly compaining about how much they pay in taxes, and they vote in favour of candidates who promise to raise taxes on 'the rich'.

OT,

RE: Social Security. I think that actually makes my case. President Bush has accepted the reality that his Social Security program will not pass, and is not fretting over it, while you continue to allow the fact that it was even proposed to get your craw. The President accepts that, even though it will probably mean that Social Security will bankrupt itself, he is willing to accept the apparent will of the people and let it continue on its own path to destruction.

I think you've made my point.

V/R
Shapley

[Shapley]

OT,

I should point out that the poll apparently does not attempt to differentiate between conservates and liberals, only Republicans and Democrats. It could be that a majority of Conservative Democrats are unhappy, or that a majority of Liberal Republicans are unhappy. We do not have information enough to attempt to define the matter in liberal vs. neocon, only Republican vs. Democrat. Not all Democrats are liberal, and not all Republicans are neocons.

V/R
Shapley

[BigJon@Work]

Originally posted by OperaTenor:
The implication that liberals are selfish and hypocritical would do Sean Hannity proud. I don't know, or have ever heard of, a single liberal who would exclude themselves from the responsibility of contributing to the greater good FOR ALL.

I don't find liberals to be selfish and hypocritical, just paternalistic and hypocritical.

[Nicole Marie]

BigJohn, Please watch your post. You are close to the line on the BBB rules. "No personal attacks – Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and disagreements are bound to crop up. However, attacks based on someone’s education level, sex, race, creed, religion, sexual orientation, etc. will not be tolerated." And I'm sure attacks on political/personal standing would fit in here too. I'm sure there is a more tactful why you could have stated your feelings on liberals.

In other news... these political posts have turned to the ridiculous! No really - they have. People just love to bicker...

Based on the number of people that have left the BBB and why so few people sign up (remember people read these things before they decide to join)... We have decided to redesign the BBB! This new design should make those that love to debate, happy. And for those that have been turned off of the Board (and there are MANY) - happy to return to chat in a less agro conversation. Stay tuned for more info!

[Shapley]

Nicole,

Glad to hear it. I love to arg... er.... debate, but I do realize that those looking for a musical thread sometimes have to wade through the muck to find it.

V/R
Shapley

[OperaTenor]

Hi Y.R.H.,

Mea maxima culpa.

It's been said many, many times that all of the political bickeri......uh, I mean, debate never persuades anyone of anything. I've tried to resist the temptation to get into it in the past and failed miserably, and I think it's time I really just let all the political stuff go and confine my debating to whether the the voice is the most sophisticated of musical instruments, or if stud finder gadgets really work(I just tried one for the first time, and it was simply AMAZING).

What was it Truman said, "The muck stops here!"? Was that it?

[Shapley]

I win, again!

BTW, Those stud finder things do a good job.

V/R
Shapley

[BigJon@Work]

Originally posted by Nicole Marie:
BigJohn, Please watch your post. You are close to the line on the BBB rules. "No personal attacks – Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and disagreements are bound to crop up. However, attacks based on someone’s education level, sex, race, creed, religion, sexual orientation, etc. will not be tolerated." And I'm sure attacks on political/personal standing would fit in here too. I'm sure there is a more tactful why you could have stated your feelings on liberals.

Begging pardon, but I thought that rule was against attacking individuals.

Originally posted by Nicole Marie:
In other news... these political posts have turned to the ridiculous! No really - they have. People just love to bicker...

Based on the number of people that have left the BBB and why so few people sign up (remember people read these things before they decide to join)... We have decided to redesign the BBB! This new design should make those that love to debate, happy. And for those that have been turned off of the Board (and there are MANY) - happy to return to chat in a less agro conversation. Stay tuned for more info!

Bicker? Sorry, I thought I was being didactic.

[Selma in Sandy Eggo]

Originally posted by Shapley:
Those stud finder things do a good job.

I may have to get me one of those.

[shostakovich]

From Shap: "Bush has accepted the reality that his Social Security program will not pass, and is not fretting over it, while you continue to allow the fact that it was even proposed to get your craw. The President accepts that, even though it will probably mean that Social Security will bankrupt itself, he is willing to accept the apparent will of the people and let it continue on its own path to destruction."
------------------------------------------------------
Yes, Bush has accepted that his Social Security proposal will not pass (but I believe it was in his budget ------------- strange), but he has not accepted the fact that it's a bad idea. As for the will of the people, I doubt they want SS to go bankrupt. They just want a more realistic way of providing for it. That means the forbidden "T" word. Rather than tax to save SS, to pay for the war, to reduce the deficit Bush ignores the obvious solution. It might affect his version of the "economy" adversely. So he would rather sink the country while preserving the philosophy that the rich get richer and the poor are not worth considering. How "compassionate"!
Shos

[Serenity]

Happiness is having a positive outlook on life, so practice positive thinking.

http://www.livescience.com/humanbiology/060227_happiness_keys.html

[Shapley]

Shos,

I'm not convinced it was a bad idea, either. I do think raising taxes is a bad idea, though. I don't think he's alone in his views there.

I've always thought of compassion as being how you share your wealth, not how you share the wealth of others.

V/R
Shapley