Hits and Misses
Theory: Having daughters makes parents more likely to be Republican.
Why are 60% of the people enrolling in the changes ineligible for subsidies?
Sexercise: Do intimate acts count as working out?
Wis. Governor Scott Walker: Let’s sidestep the exchange.
The economic argument for social conservatism is surprisingly strong, but no one makes it.
Theory: Having daughters makes parents more likely to be Republican.
I guess the Obamas are the exception to this theory.
Daughters study is not surprising in the least.
And completely undermines a faulty liberal argument.
Makes you think about some of the intrinsic differences between man and woman in society that result from simple biology.
Economic social conservatism needs a stronger argument.
Very awkward for the partners of the other 2 percent.
These ACA changes are too swift, too many. People hardly have any time to react to them.
Proud conservative. Proud father of three daughters.
Just one daughter for me and I’d do anything to protect her. Made sure she got her gun license before leaving for the city.
“Having daughters makes parents more likely to be Republican.”
It probably causes them to buy guns.
The economic argument for social conservatism is surprisingly strong, but no one makes it.
Bryan Caplan posits that social liberalism has more negative externalities than social conservatism. He suggest socially conservative Republicans could (presumably) use that as an effective argument against fiscal conservative/social liberal Libertarians. He later admits he is not a social conservative.
That does not surprise me. From my experience, most fiscally conservative Libertarians respect socially conservative values. Most Libertarians would agree that socially conservative values have fewer negative externalities. But, many Libertarians simply do not believe it’s the role of public policy to encourage values. Moreover, it is not easy to instill socially conservative values in someone who was raised without them.
Sexercise: Do intimate acts count as working out?
Sure beats the Hell out of doing sit-ups on a bosu ball!
Why are 60% of the people enrolling in the changes ineligible for subsidies?
This is a familiar story. The people most apt to navigate the complexities of bureaucracy aren’t the poor. Rather they’re middle class.