American Gentry, or, the GOP's College-Educated Whites

[Indy Texas]

I've always believed that what I term "Family Capitalism"—small and midsize privately-held firms, often in second- and third-tier metropolitan areas, and the families that own them—are an understudied and under-discussed phenomenon in American political discourse.

You can't understand "rural America" (which is often used to refer to pretty much anything that's not a Top 20 city or its immediately adjacent suburbs) without understanding the social pecking order. It helps explain everything from the rise of the Tea Party in 2010 to Trump's takeover of the GOP in 2016. It colors how the states that are generally in the bottom half of GDP per capita and most socioeconomic indicators so often embrace austerity politics and refuse things like Medicaid expansion that could easily improve those metrics. It helps explain why so many rent-seeking middleman sectors of the economy, like car dealerships and real estate agencies, can reliably marshal state government to insulate them from "disruption" by ascendant and big firms like Tesla.

The trope that rich, educated white people are Democrats and poor, uneducated white people are Republicans is one of the great lies of normie political conventional wisdom. So is the idea that the Republican Party is a barbell party consisting of a handful of superrich billionaires (the Kochs, the Mercers, the DeVoses) and a mass of poor rubes "voting against their interests."

Most of Republicans' political power since the end of the Bush Era has been in state legislatures and governors' offices. The Democrats' long overdrawn New Deal Era goodwill finally vanished from the lower rungs of government in the South and Midwest in 2010 and the election cycles that followed. Republicans began racking up trifectas in a broad swath of the country and set to work implementing their governing agenda.

But that agenda wasn't in the service of the Billionaire Class. Most billionaires and most of the companies they control are in large cities and states where Republicans hardly ever enjoy a governing mandate. Matt Bevin and Sam Brownback and Bobby Jindal didn't do what they did for the sake of Bill Gates or Jamie Dimon. They did it for the families who own businesses in their states. Republicans wrap this agenda in talk of helping "small businesses," evoking the image of a husband and wife who own a sandwich shop, or a guy with a three-bay car repair shop that he and his son operate. These aren't small businesses. They're car dealerships, heavy equipment distributors, independent oil, gas and coal producers, plumbing companies, a group of restaurant franchises, and the like. They're incredibly profitable but lack any of the glamor or cachet of a software firm or an investment bank or a consultancy. You don't get a job there with a resume full of Ivy League degrees; you get a job there because you're the youngest generation of family ownership. If you're a competent, driven person, you'll likely become the CEO doing a good job of growing and developing the business further. If you're not, that's okay too—they'll just give you a do-nothing job and you'll go play golf and stay out of the way.

You can see the Gentry in state legislatures—most of which are part time, meaning it is impossible to serve in them without having enough passive income to pay your bills. But you also see them in Congress. Markwayne Mullin (R-OK) is one (family plumbing business). Joe Manchin (D-WV) is one (family coal company). Marjorie Taylor-Green (R-GA) is one (family construction company).

These are high-income people. They went to college. They didn't lose their jobs to China or a factory assembly line robot. They have more money than 90%+ of Americans. So how do they get away with insisting they're just put-upon common folks standing up to "the Elites"? Patrick Wyman offers an explanation of this in The Atlantic this month.

American Gentry

The conspicuously consuming celebrities and jet-setting cosmopolitans of popular imagination exist, but they are far outnumbered by a less exalted and less discussed elite group,[..]

They are the people who rule over the small towns that the typical New Yorker or Angeleno might erroneously assume are peopled by nothing but poor, toothless yokels.

Their lives are incredibly comfortable and plush, but they receive none of the cultural capital or clout of a major city's high society.

These folks’ wealth extends into the millions and tens of millions rather than the billions we typically associate with the world-shaping clout of international oligarchs. [..]

Remember all the talk about the partisan divide being heavily informed by openness to experience? The downtrodden underemployed people in rundown houses in a small town in Ohio are never going to move away; they would lose their familial and social connections, which are the only real security they have in their lives. But the people on the nice side of the tracks in that town, the ones who live in grand restored late 19th century houses and are on the board of the regional chamber of commerce, are trapped too. It's where their wealth and their entire justification for their social position derives from. If they sell the family business and move to Chicago or Austin, they'll be a nobody with no legacy.

Because their wealth is rooted in the ownership of physical assets, they tend to be more rooted in their place of origin than the cosmopolitan professionals and entrepreneurs of the major metro areas are. Mobility among major metros, the characteristic jumping from Seattle to Los Angeles to New York to Austin that’s possible for younger lawyers, creatives, and tech folks, is foreign to them. They might really like heading to a vacation home in Bermuda or Maui. They might plan a relatively early retirement to a wealthy enclave in Palm Springs; Scottsdale, Arizona; or Central Florida. Ultimately, however, their money and importance comes from the businesses they own, and those belong in their locality.

Plenty of politicians invoke standing up to the billionaires in society. But if they really want to change things, they need to aim a little lower, at the tens-of-millions-aires.

When we talk about inequality, we skew our perspective by looking at the most visible manifestations of it: penthouses in New York, mansions in Beverly Hills, the lavish wastefulness of hedge-fund billionaires or a misbehaving celebrity. But that’s not who most of the United States’ wealthy elite really are. [...]

The modern Republican-Conservative Political Machine isn't fueled by Fortune 500 corporate PACs. It's fueled by guys in Dayton and Ocala who inherited their dad's business and who donate $10,000 to a state representative and then wrap them around their little finger over drinks at the local golf club.

An enormous number of organizations and institutions are dedicated to advancing the interests of this gentry class: chambers of commerce, exclusive country clubs and housing developments, the American Society of Concrete Contractors, and fruit growers’ associations, just to name a small cross section. Through these organizations and their intimate ties to local and state politics, the gentry class can and usually does wield significant power to shape society to its liking.

[AtorBoltox]

Yeah, the petite-bourgeoisie have always been the social base of Fascism 

[THG]

Speaking as someone who works in GOP politics I can confirm that the notion that much of the GOP base are wealthy midsize town residents is certainly partially true, but both parties receive a ton of money from huge corporations.

Also, wealthy non-college voters are a HUGE proportion of the GOP's support. Look at the Southern United States or Florida if you ever need any proof.

[Santander]

You're not saying anything people don't already know. And quoting literally half an article doesn't make your post any more interesting.

[Damocles]

Spoiler alert: individual states within the United States have petty nobles, just like any comparable European country. They just don't carry fancy titles with them.

[Del Tachi]

You're not saying anything people don't already know

[Ferguson97]

Speaking as someone who works in GOP politics I can confirm that the notion that much of the GOP base are wealthy midsize town residents is certainly partially true, but both parties receive a ton of money from huge corporations.

Also, wealthy non-college voters are a HUGE proportion of the GOP's support. Look at the Southern United States or Florida if you ever need any proof.

Yeah didn’t that one NYT piece basically confirm what we all assumed? Dems are popular with low education/low income and high education/low income voters, whereas GOP is popular with low education/high income and high education/high income voters?

[Mr. Illini]

They get away with saying they aren't part of the elite because they live in mid-sized cities and aren't part of the cultural elite. In fact, however, they have more money than many of the cultural elites in the big cities that they disdain.

[Person Man]

I’ve lived in Clearwater Beach as a teenager and in my downtrodden mid-20s, these people are mommy’s very special boys. At the very least, they’re bad influences. Very lucky to have the life I have now.

[Kahane's Grave Is A Gender-Neutral Bathroom]

Speaking as someone who works in GOP politics I can confirm that the notion that much of the GOP base are wealthy midsize town residents is certainly partially true, but both parties receive a ton of money from huge corporations.

Also, wealthy non-college voters are a HUGE proportion of the GOP's support. Look at the Southern United States or Florida if you ever need any proof.

Because education is increasingly not required to be a member of the Republican party.

[Person Man]

Speaking as someone who works in GOP politics I can confirm that the notion that much of the GOP base are wealthy midsize town residents is certainly partially true, but both parties receive a ton of money from huge corporations.

Also, wealthy non-college voters are a HUGE proportion of the GOP's support. Look at the Southern United States or Florida if you ever need any proof.

Because education is increasingly not required to be a member of the Republican party.

The GOP is a hustler’s party. In fact, I think that is a big reason why Florida votes 10 points to the right of where the demographics lie. There are a lot of hustlers down here. I know at least a couple of people who pick up at prices of furniture at church donations, clean them up for a few bucks, and sell them for 100 bucks. Sometimes they’ll  get 200 but they always get at least 50.

[Bismarck]

I agree with the general idea. Even in major metros you have these people. In Indianapolis you do have global elite types, the Simon and Lucas families, Lilly and Anthem executives etc. Below then you do have this “gentry” class. In addition to business owners I would add things like managers of factories, restaurant franchisers, county sheriffs, large farmers, insurance and pharmaceutical salesman, and even a lot of doctors and lawyers. These people range from upper middle class to very wealthy and in rural areas or red suburbs are almost always republicans.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Speaking as someone who works in GOP politics I can confirm that the notion that much of the GOP base are wealthy midsize town residents is certainly partially true, but both parties receive a ton of money from huge corporations.

Also, wealthy non-college voters are a HUGE proportion of the GOP's support. Look at the Southern United States or Florida if you ever need any proof.

Because education is increasingly not required to be a member of the Republican party.

I mean a lot of the dem base by this same basis are people who got tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt majoring in useless sjw degrees which didnt have good job prospects at all and they ended up working jobs people with high school grads can as well.

Isnt it much smarter to be the kid who instead of doing that decided to work at his family business, go to trade school or obtain some type of professional license and end up making more money in the long run without ending up in so much debt.

At the end of the day the problem is the system that encourages people to take the path of option A instead of option B. Now you may argue college isnt just about bettering your job prospects but actually learning about something you want to learn, but in that case then the route that should be encouraged is going to a community college then a local university instead of incurring so much debt.

[Person Man]

I agree with the general idea. Even in major metros you have these people. In Indianapolis you do have global elite types, the Simon and Lucas families, Lilly and Anthem executives etc. Below then you do have this “gentry” class. In addition to business owners I would add things like managers of factories, restaurant franchisers, county sheriffs, large farmers, insurance and pharmaceutical salesman, and even a lot of doctors and lawyers. These people range from upper middle class to very wealthy and in rural areas or red suburbs are almost always republicans.

I knew a lot of them when I was on my project at the bank in Stamford, CT. One of my roommates owned a cabin up in the Catskills and whose father built a masonry company from coming from Abruzzo in the 70s. We all probably know a lot of these people. Some of them are just hustlers who made legitimate businesses and some, like my cousin, built a small fortune as a scientific computing consultant for steel mills after starting out as a materials scientist.

[Kahane's Grave Is A Gender-Neutral Bathroom]

Speaking as someone who works in GOP politics I can confirm that the notion that much of the GOP base are wealthy midsize town residents is certainly partially true, but both parties receive a ton of money from huge corporations.

Also, wealthy non-college voters are a HUGE proportion of the GOP's support. Look at the Southern United States or Florida if you ever need any proof.

Because education is increasingly not required to be a member of the Republican party.

I mean a lot of the dem base by this same basis are people who got tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt majoring in useless sjw degrees which didnt have good job prospects at all and they ended up working jobs people with high school grads can as well.

Isnt it much smarter to be the kid who instead of doing that decided to work at his family business, go to trade school or obtain some type of professional license and end up making more money in the long run without ending up in so much debt.

At the end of the day the problem is the system that encourages people to take the path of option A instead of option B. Now you may argue college isnt just about bettering your job prospects but actually learning about something you want to learn, but in that case then the route that should be encouraged is going to a community college then a local university instead of incurring so much debt.

Just saying OSR you seem to have shifted further than -0.10 to 0.35 on social issues.

Anyway, I agree. The issue is that people have to make more considerations than just taking a job, like health care benefits and pensions plans.

College is, however, useful for degrees in non-SJW topics, of which there are many. One issue with getting jobs with a college degree is that most people go now, which is much different than decades ago. And these people are then picking dumb majors, like the 185,000 who enroll in gender studies programs every year.

We don't need anywhere near that number (or any), but this requires removing the stigma of not going to college, and of course to make sure there is an adequate job market for those who do (since there is a perception, with some truth, that non-college graduates can't get decent jobs).

I think the CA system used to be the top 10% for UC, next 30% for CS, and then the remainder to community college or trade schools. That is a good baseline, although we need to be careful to not end up like China or South Korea where class ranks are strict cut-offs that determine your life based off a few tests and result in hundreds of annual suicides.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Speaking as someone who works in GOP politics I can confirm that the notion that much of the GOP base are wealthy midsize town residents is certainly partially true, but both parties receive a ton of money from huge corporations.

Also, wealthy non-college voters are a HUGE proportion of the GOP's support. Look at the Southern United States or Florida if you ever need any proof.

Because education is increasingly not required to be a member of the Republican party.

I mean a lot of the dem base by this same basis are people who got tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt majoring in useless sjw degrees which didnt have good job prospects at all and they ended up working jobs people with high school grads can as well.

Isnt it much smarter to be the kid who instead of doing that decided to work at his family business, go to trade school or obtain some type of professional license and end up making more money in the long run without ending up in so much debt.

At the end of the day the problem is the system that encourages people to take the path of option A instead of option B. Now you may argue college isnt just about bettering your job prospects but actually learning about something you want to learn, but in that case then the route that should be encouraged is going to a community college then a local university instead of incurring so much debt.

Just saying OSR you seem to have shifted further than -0.10 to 0.35 on social issues.

Anyway, I agree. The issue is that people have to make more considerations than just taking a job, like health care benefits and pensions plans.

College is, however, useful for degrees in non-SJW topics, of which there are many. One issue with getting jobs with a college degree is that most people go now, which is much different than decades ago. And these people are then picking dumb majors, like the 185,000 who enroll in gender studies programs every year.

We don't need anywhere near that number (or any), but this requires removing the stigma of not going to college, and of course to make sure there is an adequate job market for those who do (since there is a perception, with some truth, that non-college graduates can't get decent jobs).

I think the CA system used to be the top 10% for UC, next 30% for CS, and then the remainder to community college or trade schools. That is a good baseline, although we need to be careful to not end up like China or South Korea where class ranks are strict cut-offs that determine your life based off a few tests and result in hundreds of annual suicides.

Its not only a socially liberal/conservative position I am taking but an economic one too. Having a system that incentives Scenario A over B has been a disaster and is clearly not working at all. A solution I have heard which I am not on board with right now is that companies should be barred from requiring a college degree in jobs that don't really require you to have a degree to actually do.
The reason I oppose that at the moment is I do think that would be an infringement on the rights of businesses to hire whomever they want.


Maybe you can create certain types of tax incentives for companies that train their employees for those types of jobs rather then punt job training to colleges.

[Person Man]

Speaking as someone who works in GOP politics I can confirm that the notion that much of the GOP base are wealthy midsize town residents is certainly partially true, but both parties receive a ton of money from huge corporations.

Also, wealthy non-college voters are a HUGE proportion of the GOP's support. Look at the Southern United States or Florida if you ever need any proof.

Because education is increasingly not required to be a member of the Republican party.

I mean a lot of the dem base by this same basis are people who got tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt majoring in useless sjw degrees which didnt have good job prospects at all and they ended up working jobs people with high school grads can as well.

Isnt it much smarter to be the kid who instead of doing that decided to work at his family business, go to trade school or obtain some type of professional license and end up making more money in the long run without ending up in so much debt.

At the end of the day the problem is the system that encourages people to take the path of option A instead of option B. Now you may argue college isnt just about bettering your job prospects but actually learning about something you want to learn, but in that case then the route that should be encouraged is going to a community college then a local university instead of incurring so much debt.

Just saying OSR you seem to have shifted further than -0.10 to 0.35 on social issues.

Anyway, I agree. The issue is that people have to make more considerations than just taking a job, like health care benefits and pensions plans.

College is, however, useful for degrees in non-SJW topics, of which there are many. One issue with getting jobs with a college degree is that most people go now, which is much different than decades ago. And these people are then picking dumb majors, like the 185,000 who enroll in gender studies programs every year.

We don't need anywhere near that number (or any), but this requires removing the stigma of not going to college, and of course to make sure there is an adequate job market for those who do (since there is a perception, with some truth, that non-college graduates can't get decent jobs).

I think the CA system used to be the top 10% for UC, next 30% for CS, and then the remainder to community college or trade schools. That is a good baseline, although we need to be careful to not end up like China or South Korea where class ranks are strict cut-offs that determine your life based off a few tests and result in hundreds of annual suicides.

There is a medium. What happens in places like Germany or France? It’s not quite as strict as China or Korea, but it does a good job at keeping the markets balanced by making sure every who starts can finish and everyone who finishes can get a job. That’s probably a good breakdown, though for who should go where. Perhaps those colleges for A students, should offer majors that require graduate study or have few good jobs while your typical B+ or A- students should go to schools that emphasize majors that have good career prospects without graduate study.

[Badger]

Speaking as someone who works in GOP politics I can confirm that the notion that much of the GOP base are wealthy midsize town residents is certainly partially true, but both parties receive a ton of money from huge corporations.

Also, wealthy non-college voters are a HUGE proportion of the GOP's support. Look at the Southern United States or Florida if you ever need any proof.

Because education is increasingly not required to be a member of the Republican party.

I mean a lot of the dem base by this same basis are people who got tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt majoring in useless sjw degrees which didnt have good job prospects at all and they ended up working jobs people with high school grads can as well.

Isnt it much smarter to be the kid who instead of doing that decided to work at his family business, go to trade school or obtain some type of professional license and end up making more money in the long run without ending up in so much debt.

At the end of the day the problem is the system that encourages people to take the path of option A instead of option B. Now you may argue college isnt just about bettering your job prospects but actually learning about something you want to learn, but in that case then the route that should be encouraged is going to a community college then a local university instead of incurring so much debt.

 Great point. Why indeed didn't these these millions of people simply enter a completely non existent lucrative family business instead of going to college and earning a degree in order to increase their employment prospects?After all, getting a job after college unrelatedTo one's degree 90% of the time has been the norm for only (checks notes)  Well over a century.

[Kahane's Grave Is A Gender-Neutral Bathroom]

Speaking as someone who works in GOP politics I can confirm that the notion that much of the GOP base are wealthy midsize town residents is certainly partially true, but both parties receive a ton of money from huge corporations.

Also, wealthy non-college voters are a HUGE proportion of the GOP's support. Look at the Southern United States or Florida if you ever need any proof.

Because education is increasingly not required to be a member of the Republican party.

I mean a lot of the dem base by this same basis are people who got tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt majoring in useless sjw degrees which didnt have good job prospects at all and they ended up working jobs people with high school grads can as well.

Isnt it much smarter to be the kid who instead of doing that decided to work at his family business, go to trade school or obtain some type of professional license and end up making more money in the long run without ending up in so much debt.

At the end of the day the problem is the system that encourages people to take the path of option A instead of option B. Now you may argue college isnt just about bettering your job prospects but actually learning about something you want to learn, but in that case then the route that should be encouraged is going to a community college then a local university instead of incurring so much debt.

Just saying OSR you seem to have shifted further than -0.10 to 0.35 on social issues.

Anyway, I agree. The issue is that people have to make more considerations than just taking a job, like health care benefits and pensions plans.

College is, however, useful for degrees in non-SJW topics, of which there are many. One issue with getting jobs with a college degree is that most people go now, which is much different than decades ago. And these people are then picking dumb majors, like the 185,000 who enroll in gender studies programs every year.

We don't need anywhere near that number (or any), but this requires removing the stigma of not going to college, and of course to make sure there is an adequate job market for those who do (since there is a perception, with some truth, that non-college graduates can't get decent jobs).

I think the CA system used to be the top 10% for UC, next 30% for CS, and then the remainder to community college or trade schools. That is a good baseline, although we need to be careful to not end up like China or South Korea where class ranks are strict cut-offs that determine your life based off a few tests and result in hundreds of annual suicides.

Its not only a socially liberal/conservative position I am taking but an economic one too. Having a system that incentives Scenario A over B has been a disaster and is clearly not working at all. A solution I have heard which I am not on board with right now is that companies should be barred from requiring a college degree in jobs that don't really require you to have a degree to actually do.
The reason I oppose that at the moment is I do think that would be an infringement on the rights of businesses to hire whomever they want.


Maybe you can create certain types of tax incentives for companies that train their employees for those types of jobs rather then punt job training to colleges.

ah yes "incentivizing business while improving quality of life as a whole"

or as liberals call it "corporate welfare"

[OSR stands with Israel]

Speaking as someone who works in GOP politics I can confirm that the notion that much of the GOP base are wealthy midsize town residents is certainly partially true, but both parties receive a ton of money from huge corporations.

Also, wealthy non-college voters are a HUGE proportion of the GOP's support. Look at the Southern United States or Florida if you ever need any proof.

Because education is increasingly not required to be a member of the Republican party.

I mean a lot of the dem base by this same basis are people who got tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt majoring in useless sjw degrees which didnt have good job prospects at all and they ended up working jobs people with high school grads can as well.

Isnt it much smarter to be the kid who instead of doing that decided to work at his family business, go to trade school or obtain some type of professional license and end up making more money in the long run without ending up in so much debt.

At the end of the day the problem is the system that encourages people to take the path of option A instead of option B. Now you may argue college isnt just about bettering your job prospects but actually learning about something you want to learn, but in that case then the route that should be encouraged is going to a community college then a local university instead of incurring so much debt.

 Great point. Why indeed didn't these these millions of people simply enter a completely non existent lucrative family business instead of going to college and earning a degree in order to increase their employment prospects?After all, getting a job after college unrelatedTo one's degree 90% of the time has been the norm for only (checks notes)  Well over a century.

How the hell is going into tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands in debt for a degree that has very little job prospects a good economic decision lol.

Also I notice how you also didnt read the part where I said or go to Trade School or get a Professional License.

[Person Man]

Speaking as someone who works in GOP politics I can confirm that the notion that much of the GOP base are wealthy midsize town residents is certainly partially true, but both parties receive a ton of money from huge corporations.

Also, wealthy non-college voters are a HUGE proportion of the GOP's support. Look at the Southern United States or Florida if you ever need any proof.

Because education is increasingly not required to be a member of the Republican party.

I mean a lot of the dem base by this same basis are people who got tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt majoring in useless sjw degrees which didnt have good job prospects at all and they ended up working jobs people with high school grads can as well.

Isnt it much smarter to be the kid who instead of doing that decided to work at his family business, go to trade school or obtain some type of professional license and end up making more money in the long run without ending up in so much debt.

At the end of the day the problem is the system that encourages people to take the path of option A instead of option B. Now you may argue college isnt just about bettering your job prospects but actually learning about something you want to learn, but in that case then the route that should be encouraged is going to a community college then a local university instead of incurring so much debt.

Just saying OSR you seem to have shifted further than -0.10 to 0.35 on social issues.

Anyway, I agree. The issue is that people have to make more considerations than just taking a job, like health care benefits and pensions plans.

College is, however, useful for degrees in non-SJW topics, of which there are many. One issue with getting jobs with a college degree is that most people go now, which is much different than decades ago. And these people are then picking dumb majors, like the 185,000 who enroll in gender studies programs every year.

We don't need anywhere near that number (or any), but this requires removing the stigma of not going to college, and of course to make sure there is an adequate job market for those who do (since there is a perception, with some truth, that non-college graduates can't get decent jobs).

I think the CA system used to be the top 10% for UC, next 30% for CS, and then the remainder to community college or trade schools. That is a good baseline, although we need to be careful to not end up like China or South Korea where class ranks are strict cut-offs that determine your life based off a few tests and result in hundreds of annual suicides.

Its not only a socially liberal/conservative position I am taking but an economic one too. Having a system that incentives Scenario A over B has been a disaster and is clearly not working at all. A solution I have heard which I am not on board with right now is that companies should be barred from requiring a college degree in jobs that don't really require you to have a degree to actually do.
The reason I oppose that at the moment is I do think that would be an infringement on the rights of businesses to hire whomever they want.


Maybe you can create certain types of tax incentives for companies that train their employees for those types of jobs rather then punt job training to colleges.

That would be helpful for any new workers, regardless of education level. Provide tax incentives for companies to train new workers. I can get on board with that. Forcing companies to drop education requirements as some sort of Affirmative Action thing sounds like a welfare program where you just bury a barrel of cash in the ground and have them dig it up. Though in principle I support Affirmative Action for poor and working class people of all races. You don’t even have to call it Affirmative Action and just call it one candidate has done more for themselves and accomplished more than the other candidate even if that candidate is more qualified on paper and in a static sense. Look at the velocity and magnitude of a candidate, not their static position.

[Badger]

Speaking as someone who works in GOP politics I can confirm that the notion that much of the GOP base are wealthy midsize town residents is certainly partially true, but both parties receive a ton of money from huge corporations.

Also, wealthy non-college voters are a HUGE proportion of the GOP's support. Look at the Southern United States or Florida if you ever need any proof.

Because education is increasingly not required to be a member of the Republican party.

I mean a lot of the dem base by this same basis are people who got tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt majoring in useless sjw degrees which didnt have good job prospects at all and they ended up working jobs people with high school grads can as well.

Isnt it much smarter to be the kid who instead of doing that decided to work at his family business, go to trade school or obtain some type of professional license and end up making more money in the long run without ending up in so much debt.

At the end of the day the problem is the system that encourages people to take the path of option A instead of option B. Now you may argue college isnt just about bettering your job prospects but actually learning about something you want to learn, but in that case then the route that should be encouraged is going to a community college then a local university instead of incurring so much debt.

 Great point. Why indeed didn't these these millions of people simply enter a completely non existent lucrative family business instead of going to college and earning a degree in order to increase their employment prospects?After all, getting a job after college unrelatedTo one's degree 90% of the time has been the norm for only (checks notes)  Well over a century.

How the hell is going into tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands in debt for a degree that has very little job prospects a good economic decision lol.

Also I notice how you also didnt read the part where I said or go to Trade School or get a Professional License.

 I ignored it because you're blossom insistence that people should just join these lucrative family vit businesses which you seem to believe are commonplace was  Is jaw droppingly foolish. As is your assertion that  The major to a 4 year degree matters much much 90% of the time in terms  Of post graduation employment.

Remember, Well paying skilled blue collar jobs have been declining is climbing in number drastically for the last 40 years.It's not like if 10% of current is of current bachelor candidate left college and took up plumbing There would be suddenly lots of 25 to $30 an hour plumbing jobs available.

 Just curious. You've graduated college in the last couple years IRC. Why did you bother to do so and incur all that student debt rather than getting a nice honest trade school diploma  For carpentry or the like?

[OSR stands with Israel]

Speaking as someone who works in GOP politics I can confirm that the notion that much of the GOP base are wealthy midsize town residents is certainly partially true, but both parties receive a ton of money from huge corporations.

Also, wealthy non-college voters are a HUGE proportion of the GOP's support. Look at the Southern United States or Florida if you ever need any proof.

Because education is increasingly not required to be a member of the Republican party.

I mean a lot of the dem base by this same basis are people who got tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt majoring in useless sjw degrees which didnt have good job prospects at all and they ended up working jobs people with high school grads can as well.

Isnt it much smarter to be the kid who instead of doing that decided to work at his family business, go to trade school or obtain some type of professional license and end up making more money in the long run without ending up in so much debt.

At the end of the day the problem is the system that encourages people to take the path of option A instead of option B. Now you may argue college isnt just about bettering your job prospects but actually learning about something you want to learn, but in that case then the route that should be encouraged is going to a community college then a local university instead of incurring so much debt.

 Great point. Why indeed didn't these these millions of people simply enter a completely non existent lucrative family business instead of going to college and earning a degree in order to increase their employment prospects?After all, getting a job after college unrelatedTo one's degree 90% of the time has been the norm for only (checks notes)  Well over a century.

How the hell is going into tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands in debt for a degree that has very little job prospects a good economic decision lol.

Also I notice how you also didnt read the part where I said or go to Trade School or get a Professional License.

 I ignored it because you're blossom insistence that people should just join these lucrative family vit businesses which you seem to believe are commonplace was  Is jaw droppingly foolish. As is your assertion that  The major to a 4 year degree matters much much 90% of the time in terms  Of post graduation employment.

Remember, Well paying skilled blue collar jobs have been declining is climbing in number drastically for the last 40 years.It's not like if 10% of current is of current bachelor candidate left college and took up plumbing There would be suddenly lots of 25 to $30 an hour plumbing jobs available.

 Just curious. You've graduated college in the last couple years IRC. Why did you bother to do so and incur all that student debt rather than getting a nice honest trade school diploma  For carpentry or the like?

I see you have trouble reading, as my scenario was literally describing people who get major in degrees like "gender studies" or degrees with terrible job prospects and end up working at Starbucks for minimum wage while incurring tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars of debt.

That is clearly a terrible financial choice and has caused some issues for our economy. I was clearly describing that and not people who major in degrees like Engineering, CS, Pre-Med, Pre-Law, Accounting, Finance Etc

 

[Indy Texas]

And these people are then picking dumb majors, like the 185,000 who enroll in gender studies programs every year.

That isn't happening.

Bachelor's degrees conferred by postsecondary institutions

Major	Degrees Conferred (2018)	% Total
Business	390,564	19.4%
Health professions and related programs	251,355	12.5%
Social sciences and history	160,628	8.0%
Engineering	126,687	6.3%
Biological and biomedical sciences	121,191	6.0%
Psychology	116,536	5.8%
Communication, journalism, and related programs	92,528	4.6%
Visual and performing arts	89,730	4.5%
Computer and information sciences	88,633	4.4%
Education	83,946	4.2%

Source: National Center for Education Statistics

[Indy Texas]

Speaking as someone who works in GOP politics I can confirm that the notion that much of the GOP base are wealthy midsize town residents is certainly partially true, but both parties receive a ton of money from huge corporations.

Also, wealthy non-college voters are a HUGE proportion of the GOP's support. Look at the Southern United States or Florida if you ever need any proof.

Because education is increasingly not required to be a member of the Republican party.

I mean a lot of the dem base by this same basis are people who got tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt majoring in useless sjw degrees which didnt have good job prospects at all and they ended up working jobs people with high school grads can as well.

Isnt it much smarter to be the kid who instead of doing that decided to work at his family business, go to trade school or obtain some type of professional license and end up making more money in the long run without ending up in so much debt.

At the end of the day the problem is the system that encourages people to take the path of option A instead of option B. Now you may argue college isnt just about bettering your job prospects but actually learning about something you want to learn, but in that case then the route that should be encouraged is going to a community college then a local university instead of incurring so much debt.

 Great point. Why indeed didn't these these millions of people simply enter a completely non existent lucrative family business instead of going to college and earning a degree in order to increase their employment prospects?After all, getting a job after college unrelatedTo one's degree 90% of the time has been the norm for only (checks notes)  Well over a century.

How the hell is going into tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands in debt for a degree that has very little job prospects a good economic decision lol.

Also I notice how you also didnt read the part where I said or go to Trade School or get a Professional License.

So you're saying people who are born into wealthy families should go work at the family business and everyone else should go out and be a physical laborer or craftsman.

Congratulations, you just reinvented pre-Industrial Revolution Europe.