https://www.foxbusiness.com/economy/democrat-led-state-killing-businesses-shrink-secede-several-counties
--
"I just saved a bunch of money on my insurance by switching to reverse
and leaving the scene."

On Monday, February 6, 2023 at 11:01:25 AM UTC-8, George.Anthony wrote:
> https://www.foxbusiness.com/economy/democrat-led-state-killing-businesses-shrink-secede-several-counties
> --
> "I just saved a bunch of money on my insurance by switching to reverse
> and leaving the scene."

Either your reading comprehension or your geography sucks. They're out there in Eastern Oregon, and they're mostly right. It's a whole different world over there. Their math is bullshit. Roughly 80% of Oregonians live around me in the Willamette valley, on the west side of the Cascade mountains. The way it turns out, the 80% ends up subsidizing the other 20%. Our state government spends more on them than we get back in taxes. Most of us figure it's worth it because that's all beautiful country. Naturally the numbers change depending on which counties you're talking about, but the last number I saw was that our state government would have over $300 more to spend on every man, woman, and child in the remaining state. The last map I saw showed all of the coast staying in Oregon. They are also part of the 20%, so there would still be a lot of country that is subsidized by the state government.

And look what happens. The land itself doesn't really change or go away. I really don't care if the Malheur Nature Reserve is in Idaho. Almost 60% of the land around me is owned by the Federal government and it doesn't make much difference which state it's in. The worst thing I can think of is that fishing and hunting licenses would become a lot more expensive for Oregonians who enjoy those activities in that part of the state. LOL, for that reason alone I don't think it's likely to happen. Oregonians would get a vote in any separation. They have a lot of land, but not a lot of people over there.

TB

On 2/6/2023 1:40 PM, Technobarbarian wrote:
> On Monday, February 6, 2023 at 11:01:25 AM UTC-8, George.Anthony wrote:
>> https://www.foxbusiness.com/economy/democrat-led-state-killing-businesses-shrink-secede-several-counties
>> --
>> "I just saved a bunch of money on my insurance by switching to reverse
>> and leaving the scene."
>
> Either your reading comprehension or your geography sucks. They're out there in Eastern Oregon, and they're mostly right. It's a whole different world over there. Their math is bullshit. Roughly 80% of Oregonians live around me in the Willamette valley, on the west side of the Cascade mountains. The way it turns out, the 80% ends up subsidizing the other 20%. Our state government spends more on them than we get back in taxes. Most of us figure it's worth it because that's all beautiful country. Naturally the numbers change depending on which counties you're talking about, but the last number I saw was that our state government would have over $300 more to spend on every man, woman, and child in the remaining state. The last map I saw showed all of the coast staying in Oregon. They are also part of the 20%, so there would still be a lot of country that is subsidized by the state government.
>
> And look what happens. The land itself doesn't really change or go away. I really don't care if the Malheur Nature Reserve is in Idaho. Almost 60% of the land around me is owned by the Federal government and it doesn't make much difference which state it's in. The worst thing I can think of is that fishing and hunting licenses would become a lot more expensive for Oregonians who enjoy those activities in that part of the state. LOL, for that reason alone I don't think it's likely to happen. Oregonians would get a vote in any separation. They have a lot of land, but not a lot of people over there.
>
> TB
My reading comprehension is fine and far better than yours. I couldn't
care less what part of the state it is. You humorless liberals just
don't get it.
--
"I just saved a bunch of money on my insurance by switching to reverse
and leaving the scene."

On Monday, February 6, 2023 at 1:37:39 PM UTC-8, George.Anthony wrote:
> On 2/6/2023 1:40 PM, Technobarbarian wrote:
> > On Monday, February 6, 2023 at 11:01:25 AM UTC-8, George.Anthony wrote:
> >> https://www.foxbusiness.com/economy/democrat-led-state-killing-businesses-shrink-secede-several-counties
> >> --
> >> "I just saved a bunch of money on my insurance by switching to reverse
> >> and leaving the scene."
> >
> > Either your reading comprehension or your geography sucks. They're out there in Eastern Oregon, and they're mostly right. It's a whole different world over there. Their math is bullshit. Roughly 80% of Oregonians live around me in the Willamette valley, on the west side of the Cascade mountains. The way it turns out, the 80% ends up subsidizing the other 20%. Our state government spends more on them than we get back in taxes. Most of us figure it's worth it because that's all beautiful country. Naturally the numbers change depending on which counties you're talking about, but the last number I saw was that our state government would have over $300 more to spend on every man, woman, and child in the remaining state. The last map I saw showed all of the coast staying in Oregon. They are also part of the 20%, so there would still be a lot of country that is subsidized by the state government.
> >
> > And look what happens. The land itself doesn't really change or go away.. I really don't care if the Malheur Nature Reserve is in Idaho. Almost 60% of the land around me is owned by the Federal government and it doesn't make much difference which state it's in. The worst thing I can think of is that fishing and hunting licenses would become a lot more expensive for Oregonians who enjoy those activities in that part of the state. LOL, for that reason alone I don't think it's likely to happen. Oregonians would get a vote in any separation. They have a lot of land, but not a lot of people over there.
> >
> > TB
> My reading comprehension is fine and far better than yours. I couldn't
> care less what part of the state it is. You humorless liberals just
> don't get it.
> --
> "I just saved a bunch of money on my insurance by switching to reverse
> and leaving the scene."

Actually you're the one who doesn't get it. But, it mostly isn't your fault this time. I've been told that I have a very dry sense of humor, and some people don't understand when I'm joking. The succession story has been going around for as far back as I can remember. The names change, but the story remains the same. <Best Foghorn Leghorn voice> "It's a joke son. I say, it's a joke." I'm sure there are people who take it seriously, but, seriously. It's a joke. We will never see it happen in our lifetime. The folks over there are mostly there because it can be very nice there. Because it can be very nice there most Oregonians consider it part of their playground. Get a child to explain the math to you.

TB

On 2/6/2023 6:13 PM, Technobarbarian wrote:
> On Monday, February 6, 2023 at 1:37:39 PM UTC-8, George.Anthony wrote:
>> On 2/6/2023 1:40 PM, Technobarbarian wrote:
>>> On Monday, February 6, 2023 at 11:01:25 AM UTC-8, George.Anthony wrote:
>>>> https://www.foxbusiness.com/economy/democrat-led-state-killing-businesses-shrink-secede-several-counties
>>>> --
>>>> "I just saved a bunch of money on my insurance by switching to reverse
>>>> and leaving the scene."
>>>
>>> Either your reading comprehension or your geography sucks. They're out there in Eastern Oregon, and they're mostly right. It's a whole different world over there. Their math is bullshit. Roughly 80% of Oregonians live around me in the Willamette valley, on the west side of the Cascade mountains. The way it turns out, the 80% ends up subsidizing the other 20%. Our state government spends more on them than we get back in taxes. Most of us figure it's worth it because that's all beautiful country. Naturally the numbers change depending on which counties you're talking about, but the last number I saw was that our state government would have over $300 more to spend on every man, woman, and child in the remaining state. The last map I saw showed all of the coast staying in Oregon. They are also part of the 20%, so there would still be a lot of country that is subsidized by the state government.
>>>
>>> And look what happens. The land itself doesn't really change or go away. I really don't care if the Malheur Nature Reserve is in Idaho. Almost 60% of the land around me is owned by the Federal government and it doesn't make much difference which state it's in. The worst thing I can think of is that fishing and hunting licenses would become a lot more expensive for Oregonians who enjoy those activities in that part of the state. LOL, for that reason alone I don't think it's likely to happen. Oregonians would get a vote in any separation. They have a lot of land, but not a lot of people over there.
>>>
>>> TB
>> My reading comprehension is fine and far better than yours. I couldn't
>> care less what part of the state it is. You humorless liberals just
>> don't get it.
>> --
>> "I just saved a bunch of money on my insurance by switching to reverse
>> and leaving the scene."
>
> Actually you're the one who doesn't get it. But, it mostly isn't your fault this time. I've been told that I have a very dry sense of humor, and some people don't understand when I'm joking. The succession story has been going around for as far back as I can remember. The names change, but the story remains the same. <Best Foghorn Leghorn voice> "It's a joke son. I say, it's a joke." I'm sure there are people who take it seriously, but, seriously. It's a joke. We will never see it happen in our lifetime. The folks over there are mostly there because it can be very nice there. Because it can be very nice there most Oregonians consider it part of their playground. Get a child to explain the math to you.
>
> TB
As I said, you don't get it. I don't care about east or west or whatever
math you are talking about. It was a joke. Live with it.
--
"I just saved a bunch of money on my insurance by switching to reverse
and leaving the scene."

On 2023-02-06 19:40:16 +0000, Technobarbarian said:

> On Monday, February 6, 2023 at 11:01:25 AM UTC-8, George.Anthony wrote:
>> https://www.foxbusiness.com/economy/democrat-led-state-killing-businesses-shrink-secede-several-counties>
>> --> "I just saved a bunch of money on my insurance by switching to
>> reverse> and leaving the scene."
>
> Either your reading comprehension or your geography sucks.
> They're out there in Eastern Oregon, and they're mostly right. It's a
> whole different world over there. Their math is bullshit. Roughly 80%
> of Oregonians live around me in the Willamette valley, on the west side
> of the Cascade mountains. The way it turns out, the 80% ends up
> subsidizing the other 20%. Our state government spends more on them
> than we get back in taxes. Most of us figure it's worth it because
> that's all beautiful country. Naturally the numbers change depending on
> which counties you're talking about, but the last number I saw was that
> our state government would have over $300 more to spend on every man,
> woman, and child in the remaining state. The last map I saw showed all
> of the coast staying in Oregon. They are also part of the 20%, so there
> would still be a lot of country that is subsidized by the state
> government.

The thing is they aren't asking Idaho.... surveys of Idaho voters show
they don't want the added costs of supporting the tax hole that is
eastern Oregon (nor eastern Washington)

Years ago I knew a state legislator from eastern Washington, he said he
could never convince the majority of his voters that they got more in
spending than they paid in taxes... even though they did, year ater
year.

Ralph E Lindberg <email@domain.com> wrote:
> On 2023-02-06 19:40:16 +0000, Technobarbarian said:
>
>> On Monday, February 6, 2023 at 11:01:25 AM UTC-8, George.Anthony wrote:
>>> https://www.foxbusiness.com/economy/democrat-led-state-killing-businesses-shrink-secede-several-counties>
>>>
>>> --> "I just saved a bunch of money on my insurance by switching to
>>> reverse> and leaving the scene."
>>
>> Either your reading comprehension or your geography sucks.
>> They're out there in Eastern Oregon, and they're mostly right. It's a
>> whole different world over there. Their math is bullshit. Roughly 80%
>> of Oregonians live around me in the Willamette valley, on the west side
>> of the Cascade mountains. The way it turns out, the 80% ends up
>> subsidizing the other 20%. Our state government spends more on them
>> than we get back in taxes. Most of us figure it's worth it because
>> that's all beautiful country. Naturally the numbers change depending on
>> which counties you're talking about, but the last number I saw was that
>> our state government would have over $300 more to spend on every man,
>> woman, and child in the remaining state. The last map I saw showed all
>> of the coast staying in Oregon. They are also part of the 20%, so there
>> would still be a lot of country that is subsidized by the state
>> government.
>
> The thing is they aren't asking Idaho.... surveys of Idaho voters show
> they don't want the added costs of supporting the tax hole that is
> eastern Oregon (nor eastern Washington)
>
> Years ago I knew a state legislator from eastern Washington, he said he
> could never convince the majority of his voters that they got more in
> spending than they paid in taxes... even though they did, year ater
> year.
>
>

I wouldn’t blame Idahoans for welcoming Oregonians with open arms.

--
“If you love me I will always be in your heart. If you hate me I will
always be in your mind.” - Donald ‘William Shakespeare’ Trump

George.Anthony <ganthony@gmail.net> wrote:
> Ralph E Lindberg <email@domain.com> wrote:
>> On 2023-02-06 19:40:16 +0000, Technobarbarian said:
>>
>>> On Monday, February 6, 2023 at 11:01:25 AM UTC-8, George.Anthony wrote:
>>>> https://www.foxbusiness.com/economy/democrat-led-state-killing-businesses-shrink-secede-several-counties>
>>>>
>>>> --> "I just saved a bunch of money on my insurance by switching to
>>>> reverse> and leaving the scene."
>>>
>>> Either your reading comprehension or your geography sucks.
>>> They're out there in Eastern Oregon, and they're mostly right. It's a
>>> whole different world over there. Their math is bullshit. Roughly 80%
>>> of Oregonians live around me in the Willamette valley, on the west side
>>> of the Cascade mountains. The way it turns out, the 80% ends up
>>> subsidizing the other 20%. Our state government spends more on them
>>> than we get back in taxes. Most of us figure it's worth it because
>>> that's all beautiful country. Naturally the numbers change depending on
>>> which counties you're talking about, but the last number I saw was that
>>> our state government would have over $300 more to spend on every man,
>>> woman, and child in the remaining state. The last map I saw showed all
>>> of the coast staying in Oregon. They are also part of the 20%, so there
>>> would still be a lot of country that is subsidized by the state
>>> government.
>>
>> The thing is they aren't asking Idaho.... surveys of Idaho voters show
>> they don't want the added costs of supporting the tax hole that is
>> eastern Oregon (nor eastern Washington)
>>
>> Years ago I knew a state legislator from eastern Washington, he said he
>> could never convince the majority of his voters that they got more in
>> spending than they paid in taxes... even though they did, year ater
>> year.
>>
>>
>
> I wouldn’t blame Idahoans for welcoming Oregonians with open arms.
>

That would be not welcoming of course.

--
“If you love me I will always be in your heart. If you hate me I will
always be in your mind.” - Donald ‘William Shakespeare’ Trump