PDA

View Full Version : The 5 poorest states are all in Daa-South



Cigar
09-25-2013, 06:49 AM
While the Richest are in the North and Hawaii

Census report released earlier this month put median household income, adjusted for inflation, at $51,017 in 2012, and said that most people have had no gains since the economy hit bottom in 2009.

Sheldon Danziger, the president of the Russell Sage Foundation, views the stagnation as a metaphor for the economic recovery. Most of the gains are going to the wealthiest Americans, he said. "I don't see any bright prospects for the median worker, much less the poor."

Not surprisingly, the types of jobs available in each state affect incomes. Residents of states with the highest median incomes were more likely to be employed in information, finance and other professional sectors, the Census Bureau data show.

Each of the 10 states with the lowest incomes in 2012 also had poverty rates that exceeded the national average. Nationally, the poverty rate held steady at just below 16% in 2012. Government programs remain a lifeline for millions.

Residents of low-income states had relatively high rates of employment in the retail, manufacturing and transportation sectors. The high proportion of manufacturing jobs might be surprising, but it reflects the changing nature of the nation's manufacturing industry.

"There's a difference between unionized auto company workers and non-unionized parts suppliers," Danziger said. "Even when manufacturers haven't cut wages, they are adopting labor-saving technological change."

Poorest states:
___5. Kentucky
___4. Alabama
___3. West Virgina
___2. Arkansas
___1. Mississippi


http://money.msn.com/investing/americas-richest-and-poorest-states?gt1=33002

Great representation I guess ....

Alyosha
09-25-2013, 07:35 AM
Virginia and Maryland are not in the North and they now have the 6 richest counties, save one in America.

Alyosha
09-25-2013, 07:37 AM
http://www.wjla.com/pictures/2012/09/top-10-richest-counties-in-u-s---7-in-d-c-area/-1-loudoun-county-va-25978-1804.html

Top 10 richest counties in U.S. - 7 in D.C. area
According to The Washington Post, seven counties in the D.C. area are in the top 10 richest in the nation.
One boasts a median income of $119,000! Do you live in one of the richest counties?

#1 Loudoun County, VA
It's not the first year Loudoun has topped the
list as America's richest county. Loudoun benefits from its close
proximity to the District and its international airport. In 2011, its
median income was a whopping $119,134.

Libhater
09-25-2013, 10:14 AM
http://www.wjla.com/pictures/2012/09/top-10-richest-counties-in-u-s---7-in-d-c-area/-1-loudoun-county-va-25978-1804.html

Top 10 richest counties in U.S. - 7 in D.C. area


According to The Washington Post, seven counties in the D.C. area are in the top 10 richest in the nation.
One boasts a median income of $119,000! Do you live in one of the richest counties?

#1 Loudoun County, VA


It's not the first year Loudoun has topped the
list as America's richest county. Loudoun benefits from its close
proximity to the District and its international airport. In 2011, its
median income was a whopping $119,134.

Yeah, these rich communities that cigar is joyous about are made up of people working in the public sector, i.e. government jobs that are paid for from the taxes of the working people in those poor Southern states. What a vicious web the socialists weave.

bladimz
09-25-2013, 10:20 AM
Yeah, these rich communities that cigar is joyous about are made up of people working in the public sector, i.e. government jobs that are paid for from the taxes of the working people in those poor Southern states. What a vicious web the socialists weave.
Note that the post you're referring to was posted by Aloysha, not Cigar...

Chris
09-25-2013, 10:25 AM
Virginia and Maryland are not in the North and they now have the 6 richest counties, save one in America.



I protest! Cigar can cherry pick his data and relocate states to suit his agenda all he wants.

Alyosha
09-25-2013, 10:25 AM
Yeah, these rich communities that cigar is joyous about are made up of people working in the public sector, i.e. government jobs that are paid for from the taxes of the working people in those poor Southern states. What a vicious web the socialists weave.

Virginia would consider itself part of the "South". It's below the Mason Dixon line and we did have the White House of the Confederacy here, as well as, Robert E. Lee being born in VA.

And it's not government jobs raising the standard of living its the lobbyists, quite frankly.

Chris
09-25-2013, 10:36 AM
As Paul harvey might say, and now for the rest of the story. Cigar's link links to source America’s Richest (and Poorest) States (http://247wallst.com/special-report/2013/09/19/americas-richest-and-poorest-states/) that says:


Last year, household income remained effectively unchanged, according to data released this week by the U.S. Census Bureau. This is despite the fact that the U.S. added nearly 2.2 million jobs in 2012.

“The big story is that everything was stagnant over the year” said Economic Policy Institute’s Elise Gould. “We’re stagnant, and continue to be in a bad place....

Cigar
09-25-2013, 10:39 AM
As Paul harvey might say, and now for the rest of the story. Cigar's link links to source America’s Richest (and Poorest) States (http://247wallst.com/special-report/2013/09/19/americas-richest-and-poorest-states/) that says:

Maybe another Tax Break for the mythical Job Creators would help ...

Chris
09-25-2013, 10:44 AM
Maybe another Tax Break for the mythical Job Creators would help ...


When did the government ever get a tax break?


(Note how quickly the thread goes off topic.)

Libhater
09-25-2013, 11:02 AM
Note that the post you're referring to was posted by Aloysha, not Cigar...

I know that, but my comments were in response to Cigar's opening posting.

Cigar
09-25-2013, 11:06 AM
I know that, but my comments were in response to Cigar's opening posting.

That explains why you can't ever hit your target ...

Maybe if you stood up on a box.

Chris
09-25-2013, 11:28 AM
That explains why you can't ever hit your target ...

Maybe if you stood up on a box.



Note the third change of topic. Did you ever have any sincere interest in discussing your topic?

bladimz
09-25-2013, 12:09 PM
Poorest states:
___5. Kentucky
___4. Alabama
___3. West Virgina
___2. Arkansas
___1. Mississippi


http://money.msn.com/investing/americas-richest-and-poorest-states?gt1=33002

Great representation I guess .... Poverty rate per state:
(includes unrelated children)
Kentucky: 17.1%
Alabama: 16.8%
West Virginia: 16%
Arkansas: 19.1%
Mississippi: 23.2%

4062

http://goo.gl/GsREzl

The darker the image the poorer the states.

Note that the general location of the poorest states is in the southern states. Is this a problem (I would guess that all would agree). Should this be resolved? If so, how can this be resolved. Who or what is responsible for these horrific rates?

Chris
09-25-2013, 12:23 PM
Yea but...

http://i.snag.gy/Ioz2S.jpg

Easy solution, right, just hand out passports rather than free cellphones!

patrickt
09-25-2013, 12:36 PM
And here I thought it would be a thread about the lingering effects of what was called the "Reconstruction" which was, of course, nothing of the sort.

Mainecoons
09-25-2013, 01:00 PM
Poverty rate per state:
(includes unrelated children)
Kentucky: 17.1%
Alabama: 16.8%
West Virginia: 16%
Arkansas: 19.1%
Mississippi: 23.2%

4062

http://goo.gl/GsREzl

The darker the image the poorer the states.

Note that the general location of the poorest states is in the southern states. Is this a problem (I would guess that all would agree). Should this be resolved? If so, how can this be resolved. Who or what is responsible for these horrific rates?

First question you have to ask when you see something like this is whether it is adjusted for local cost of living or just based on generalized income data.

It is a helluva lot cheaper to live in NM, for example, than NY. If you don't correct for that, you aren't really telling the whole story.

Libhater
09-25-2013, 01:21 PM
That explains why you can't ever hit your target ...

Maybe if you stood up on a box.

Looks like I hit the target square on since you responded rather quickly to my bulls eye. LOL!

Cigar
09-25-2013, 01:24 PM
Looks like I hit the target square on since you responded rather quickly to my bulls eye. LOL!

Looks like the only Bulls Eye you're interested in is depicted in your avatar ... :laugh:

The Xl
09-25-2013, 01:26 PM
First question you have to ask when you see something like this is whether it is adjusted for local cost of living or just based on generalized income data.

It is a helluva lot cheaper to live in NM, for example, than NY. If you don't correct for that, you aren't really telling the whole story.

Was coming in to say this.

bladimz
09-25-2013, 02:51 PM
First question you have to ask when you see something like this is whether it is adjusted for local cost of living or just based on generalized income data.

It is a helluva lot cheaper to live in NM, for example, than NY. If you don't correct for that, you aren't really telling the whole story.Whether corrected for region or not, the story itself is the same: poor is poor.

According to The U.S. census poverty thresholds of 2011,
a single person is considered to be living in poverty if they earn less than $11,400 a year. It doesn't really matter where you live. That's poor. At least in the U.S. it is. I don't know about ol' Mexico.

Chris
09-25-2013, 03:38 PM
Poverty rate per state:
(includes unrelated children)
Kentucky: 17.1%
Alabama: 16.8%
West Virginia: 16%
Arkansas: 19.1%
Mississippi: 23.2%

4062

http://goo.gl/GsREzl

The darker the image the poorer the states.

Note that the general location of the poorest states is in the southern states. Is this a problem (I would guess that all would agree). Should this be resolved? If so, how can this be resolved. Who or what is responsible for these horrific rates?



I was going to ask a simple question, does poverty end at the boundary of a state? But I found my answer at your link:

http://i.snag.gy/jhpCq.jpg

Trying paint America state by state is kind of misleading and probably only useful for partisan hackery and bickering.

Mainecoons
09-25-2013, 04:04 PM
Whether corrected for region or not, the story itself is the same: poor is poor.

According to The U.S. census poverty thresholds of 2011,
a single person is considered to be living in poverty if they earn less than $11,400 a year. It doesn't really matter where you live. That's poor. At least in the U.S. it is. I don't know about ol' Mexico.

Again, incorrect without cost of living correction.

roadmaster
09-25-2013, 04:12 PM
First question you have to ask when you see something like this is whether it is adjusted for local cost of living or just based on generalized income data.

It is a helluva lot cheaper to live in NM, for example, than NY. If you don't correct for that, you aren't really telling the whole story. Yes it's cheaper in the south and are they also counting illegals? You can buy a nice farm house with land in SC for under 100,000. What can you buy in NY for that?

Libhater
09-25-2013, 05:12 PM
under 100,000. What can you buy in NY for that?

I'm guessing a dinner at a 5 star restaurant to contribute to one of obama's funds, and to get the displeasure of meeting Obama and his overbearing wife.

nic34
09-25-2013, 05:56 PM
I was going to ask a simple question, does poverty end at the boundary of a state? But I found my answer at your link:

http://i.snag.gy/jhpCq.jpg

Trying paint America state by state is kind of misleading and probably only useful for partisan hackery and bickering.

As you can see the poverty rate is badly skewed by the native population.

Native American reservation inequality underlies a range of societal issues that affect the lives of Native American (http://thepoliticalforums.com/wiki/Native_Americans_in_the_United_States) populations residing on reservations in the United States. About one third of the Native American population, about 700,000 persons, lives on reservations in the United States.[1] (http://thepoliticalforums.com/#cite_note-harvard-1) Reservation poverty (http://thepoliticalforums.com/wiki/Reservation_poverty) and other discriminatory factors have led to persisting social inequality on Native American reservations.



http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/02/Bia-map-indian-reservations-usa.png/800px-Bia-map-indian-reservations-usa.png (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/02/Bia-map-indian-reservations-usa.png)


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Native_Americans_and_reservation_inequality

Look at the states w/o reservations that have high poverty now....

Chris
09-25-2013, 06:29 PM
Then why stay on the reservations? Assimilate.

Mainecoons
09-25-2013, 09:25 PM
That's exactly it. They stay on the reservation, drink and collect welfare. And rot.

The "native Americans" were the first victims of the welfare state. I lived in NM for 14 years. It really was pitiful to see.

bladimz
09-26-2013, 10:35 AM
Yes it's cheaper in the south and are they also counting illegals? You can buy a nice farm house with land in SC for under 100,000. What can you buy in NY for that?For those of you who are clamoring for this: The last column is the percentage of poverty regionally adjusted.




Rank
State
Poverty Rate
(by Household Income)
People in Poverty
by Household Income
(in thousands)
2009 Poverty Rates
(includes unrelated children)
Supplemental Poverty Measure
(Geographically Adjusted)


-
United States
12.6%
45,950




01
New Hampshire (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Hampshire)
5.6%
73
7.9%
10.4%


02
New Jersey (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Jersey)
6.8%
592
9.5%
12.2%


03
Vermont (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vermont)
7.6%
47
9.6%
8.3%


04
Minnesota (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota)
8.1%
412
11.1%
10.7%


05
Hawaii (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawaii)
8.6%
110
12.6%
18.0%


06
Delaware (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delaware)
9.2%
78
12.4%
13.9%


07
Utah (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utah)
9.2%
231
9.8%
9.5%


08
Virginia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virginia)
9.2%
684
10.8%
11.7%


09
Connecticut (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Connecticut)
9.7%
326
8.6%
11.1%


10
Nebraska (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nebraska)
9.5%
167
10.0%
9.1%


11
Maryland (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maryland)
9.7%
542
9.7%
14.0%


12
Idaho (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idaho)
9.9%
143
13.9%
11.6%


13
Alaska (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alaska)
10.0%
66
12.1%
11.0%


14
Massachusetts (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massachusetts)
10.1%
641
10.9%
13.6%


15
Washington (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_(U.S._state))
10.2%
636
11.9%
11.2%


16
Wisconsin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wisconsin)
10.2%
553
11.1%
10.7%


17
Nevada (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nevada)
10.6%
260
13.1%
17.2%


18
Wyoming (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wyoming)
10.6%
54
9.3%
9.0%


19
Florida (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida)
11.1%
2,250
14.6%
19.5%


20
North Dakota (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Dakota)
11.2%
70
11.0%
8.4%


21
Pennsylvania (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pennsylvania)
11.2%
1,372
11.2%
10.5%


22
Iowa (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iowa)
11.3%
327
10.9%
7.9%


23
Colorado (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colorado)
11.4%
530
12.4%
14.8%


24
Illinois (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illinois)
11.5%
1,441
13.3%
13.8%


25
Missouri (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missouri)
11.6%
659
15.6%
12.8%


26
South Dakota (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Dakota)
11.8%
90
14.3%
11.6%


27
Michigan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michigan)
12.0%
1,196
14.2%
12.4%


28
Oregon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oregon)
12.0%
436
13.7%
13.3%


29
Rhode Island (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhode_Island)
12.1%
127
13.2%
12.2%


30
Ohio (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ohio)
12.3%
1,392
13.5%
11.5%


31
Kansas (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kansas)
12.5%
337
13.9%
11.1%


32
Indiana (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indiana)
12.6%
774
16.4%
14.8%


33
Maine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maine)
12.6%
166
11.6%
9.6%


34
North Carolina (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Carolina)
13.1%
1,115
17.0%
14.3%


35
California (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California)
13.2%
4,716
15.5%
22.4%


36
Montana (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montana)
13.8%
128
13.5%
10.5%


37
Georgia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgia_(U.S._state))
14.4%
1,298
18.5%
18.8%


38
New York (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York)
14.5%
2,760
15.9%
17.6%


39
Kentucky (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kentucky)
14.8%
599
17.1%
13.2%


40
Tennessee (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tennessee)
15.0%
872
16.7%
14.3%


41
South Carolina (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Carolina)
15.0%
626
13.8%
13.8%


42
Arizona (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arizona)
15.2%
917
21.3%
21.6%


43
West Virginia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Virginia)
15.4%
276
16.0%
11.3%


44
Oklahoma (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oklahoma)
15.6%
543
13.0%
10.8%


45
Arkansas (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arkansas)
15.9%
509
19.1%
15.9%


46
Texas (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas)
16.2%
3,681
17.4%
16.5%


47
Alabama (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alabama)
16.7%
750
16.8%
15.9%


48
New Mexico (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Mexico)
17.9%
347
19.6%
15.8%


49
Louisiana (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louisiana)
18.3%
748
14.3%
12.8%


50
Mississippi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mississippi)
20.1%
571
23.2%
17%


51
District of Columbia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia)
20.7%
15
18.0%
23.1%



Poor is poor, no matter where you live, no matter what your ethnicity or race.

Mister D
09-26-2013, 10:51 AM
DC, CA, and AZ are among the highest. I didn't realize there were so many Injuns in AZ so in was a little surpirsed at first.

Mainecoons
09-26-2013, 10:59 AM
Yes, thank you Blad.

Hawaii-18%
New York-17.6%
D.C.-23%
California-22.4%

How can these liberal paradises have such high poverty rates?

Mister D
09-26-2013, 11:06 AM
Yes, thank you Blad.

Hawaii-18%
New York-17.6%
D.C.-23%
California-22.4%

How can these liberal paradises have such high poverty rates?

Hawaii has a large indigenous population

NYC is full of poor migrants (granted, upstate has many low income natives)

DC :afro:

CA is a Mexican colony

Mainecoons
09-26-2013, 11:12 AM
It would be interesting to correlate the figures with minority percentages but that no doubt would get us branded as racists immediately.

Does seem though that those places that have high minority percentages have high adjusted poverty rates.

Chris
09-26-2013, 11:15 AM
...
Poor is poor, no matter where you live, no matter what your ethnicity or race.



Poor is relative, there will always be poor, just as there always will be rich. The problem in the US is the middle is being gutted.

Mister D
09-26-2013, 11:18 AM
It would be interesting to correlate the figures with minority percentages but that no doubt would get us branded as racists immediately.

Does seem though that those places that have high minority percentages have high adjusted poverty rates.

Yes, it does. I just heard CA is making moves to further accomodate a foreign population that has helped bankrupt their state. This is in the interest of no one but the migrants themselves and the politicians who hope for their electoral support.

nic34
09-26-2013, 11:25 AM
Then why stay on the reservations? Assimilate.

Just like that? Sure. Easy for you to say..... as they say.... .......but are you starting a new thread?


Maybe if natives are able to develop their own recources and in so doing begin to accept these ways, they can begin to lift themselves out of poverty. But unless you "walked a mile in their moccasins" you wouldn't know how difficult it will be.


Some tribes are taking steps to improve their legal structures, such as adopting new commercial codes to make their laws more uniform. Over a 30-year period, reservations that had adopted the judicial systems of the states where they’re located saw their per capita income grow 30% faster than reservations that didn’t, according to a study by Anderson and Parker. A separate study by Parker shows that Native Americans are 50% more likely to have a loan application approved when lenders have access to state courts. “Putting reservations under the legal jurisdiction of the states, and facilitating better legal codes and better functioning court systems, would assist tribes in developing their land,” says Anderson.

A bigger obstacle to these reforms may not be logistics or special interests, but the culture of the reservations and the generations after generations of dependency. Indeed, a notice on a bulletin board in Garryowen, Montana, inside the Crow reservation and near the site of Custer’s Last Stand, announces when the next round of “per capita payment checks”—derived from Crow Nation trust income–will be mailed.

“Privatizing land is fine but it falls far short of the answer,” says Yellowtail. “Our people don’t understand business. After 10 or 15 generations of not being involved in business, they’ve lost their feel for it. Capitalism is considered threatening to our identity, our traditions. Successful entrepreneurs are considered sell-outs, they’re ostracized. We have to promote the dignity of self-sufficiency among Indians. Instead we have a culture of malaise: ‘The tribe will take care of us.’ We accept the myth of communalism. And we don’t value education. We resist it.”

But Yellowtail believes that the situation is improving. He says there are more entrepreneurs than 20 years ago as networks of Native American business people have sprung up in Montana and elsewhere. “We have to start with micro loans, encouraging small businesses. Then we have to make it okay to leave the reservation because the most successful are going to want to branch out. Entrepreneurs are going to have to stick their neck out, be a role model. We Indians are going to have to do it.”

http://www.forbes.com/sites/johnkoppisch/2011/12/13/why-are-indian-reservations-so-poor-a-look-at-the-bottom-1/2/

Mister D
09-26-2013, 11:27 AM
Perhaps Indians can't compete with Europeans on their own terms? Perhaps their traditonal way of life would be better for them?

Chris
09-26-2013, 12:01 PM
Just like that? Sure. Easy for you to say..... as they say.... .......but are you starting a new thread?


Maybe if natives are able to develop their own recources and in so doing begin to accept these ways, they can begin to lift themselves out of poverty. But unless you "walked a mile in their moccasins" you wouldn't know how difficult it will be.


Some tribes are taking steps to improve their legal structures, such as adopting new commercial codes to make their laws more uniform. Over a 30-year period, reservations that had adopted the judicial systems of the states where they’re located saw their per capita income grow 30% faster than reservations that didn’t, according to a study by Anderson and Parker. A separate study by Parker shows that Native Americans are 50% more likely to have a loan application approved when lenders have access to state courts. “Putting reservations under the legal jurisdiction of the states, and facilitating better legal codes and better functioning court systems, would assist tribes in developing their land,” says Anderson.

A bigger obstacle to these reforms may not be logistics or special interests, but the culture of the reservations and the generations after generations of dependency. Indeed, a notice on a bulletin board in Garryowen, Montana, inside the Crow reservation and near the site of Custer’s Last Stand, announces when the next round of “per capita payment checks”—derived from Crow Nation trust income–will be mailed.

“Privatizing land is fine but it falls far short of the answer,” says Yellowtail. “Our people don’t understand business. After 10 or 15 generations of not being involved in business, they’ve lost their feel for it. Capitalism is considered threatening to our identity, our traditions. Successful entrepreneurs are considered sell-outs, they’re ostracized. We have to promote the dignity of self-sufficiency among Indians. Instead we have a culture of malaise: ‘The tribe will take care of us.’ We accept the myth of communalism. And we don’t value education. We resist it.”

But Yellowtail believes that the situation is improving. He says there are more entrepreneurs than 20 years ago as networks of Native American business people have sprung up in Montana and elsewhere. “We have to start with micro loans, encouraging small businesses. Then we have to make it okay to leave the reservation because the most successful are going to want to branch out. Entrepreneurs are going to have to stick their neck out, be a role model. We Indians are going to have to do it.”

http://www.forbes.com/sites/johnkoppisch/2011/12/13/why-are-indian-reservations-so-poor-a-look-at-the-bottom-1/2/


Every group in America has done it. The Irish, the Germans, the Italians, the Polish...

lynn
09-26-2013, 12:13 PM
It seems the only business that is working for the Indian tribes are their casinos and their expansion of hotel resorts. I live in Arizona and we have many casinos but I don't see them using that money to build other types of businesses on their land.

nic34
09-26-2013, 12:44 PM
Every group in America has done it. The Irish, the Germans, the Italians, the Polish...

except they aren't immigrants like them..... maybe they should move to Europe and take their land?

Mister D
09-26-2013, 02:43 PM
except they aren't immigrants like them..... maybe they should move to Europe and take their land?

4073

Chris
09-26-2013, 02:49 PM
except they aren't immigrants like them..... maybe they should move to Europe and take their land?


Uh, not immigrants, so?