urbanSTL

Local governance! Except for those damn liberals...

^Good grief! Could Onder be more transparent? I'd like to recall him as unqualified and appoint a replacement to receive his salary. They would surely do a better job.

Agree, the people in Jefferson City don't seem to care all that much about the will of the people. They've overturned several things that were overwhelmingly voted in favor of, puppy mill legislation comes to mind, yet these guys never pay any political price for it. It seems their interests trump (pun intended) all others.

Is gerrymandering the root cause of this rural state takeover?

Since he's transparently attacking a particular circuit attorney . . . I did do a second map:



And since the two tell an interesting story together, I'll repost the Bush/Clay map as well.



I'd say we're now a city of four distinct political machines whose interests sometimes overlap. We have a northside machine clearly visible in both maps backing Gardner and Clay. The old southside machine of Gephardt and Slay came to bat for Carl. And the progressive machine backed Bush. But I don't think the progressive machine alone can explain Bush, since the northside machine was pretty solid for Clay and the southside machine more or less split on that one. I'm not sure where it's centered, but I'll posit that it's basically a product of BLM activism, and it's actually been active a few cycles now. Maybe the near north side on the northern boundaries of downtown and midtown? Or maybe Old North or St. Louis Place? It's not as clear since there's a lot more loyalty to the old northside machine than the southside machine, which is rather moribund these days. (Still real, but . . . not vibrant. And increasingly switching parties anyway.)

Interesting Demographics for US Congressional District 2 in Missouri where Jill Schupp will face-off against incumbent for the last 8 years Ann Wagner.  I'm not saying it's gerrymandered necessarily, but the candidates will be more inclined to appeal to Asian lives than Black lives based on the Demographics breakdown from Wikipedia.  

^There's a fairly good cluster of Asian groceries out west of 270 on Olive and another on Manchester. Some Korean. Some Indian. Some pan Asian. (Not that this is necessarily particularly indicative of who lives there, but . . . ) We went out to one for a free bottle of fish sauce once even though they're a pretty good hike for us. (It's always worth checking out the new grocery store at least once.)

I won't say that will be an easy district for a Democrat to win, but I have to think it would at least be a possibility, particularly now.

I would reckon that the black population in this district has grown a point or two since the last count.

Getcha some, Rep!
SMH, please resign

Stltoday - Ethics panel rebukes St. Louis lawmaker for having sex with intern

https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/gov ... 0c41e.html

So, the hillbillies in Jeff City have decided give voters the middle finger and not fund Medicaid expansion despite the referendum. We have the shittiest state legislature in the country.

https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/gov ... op-story-1

I hate it.

Would Illinois have us? Please.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I could never live in Illinois. If St. Louis were to somehow join Illinois, I'd leave. 

Why would anyone want to be part of a state with one of the worst pension crises in the country, is bankrupt, has crap infrastructure, continuing to lose population throughout the state, a history of corrupt politicians in Springfield, and a billionaire Governor that looks like Jabba the Hutt? And while some view it as an upside for political reasons, I don't like Chicago enough to share a state with it. The people there are rude.

Illinois, like New Jersey, is a junk state. The two worst states in the country in my opinion. I'll move to any other state before those two.

I'll gladly take Jeff City Rednecks over the Springfield corruptables any day of the week. 

I’ll gladly live in a broke state that respects the will of the voters over a racist state with a surplus.

*moved to Chicago 2 years ago*


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

addxb2 wrote:I’ll gladly live in a broke state that respects the will of the voters over a racist state with a surplus.

*moved to Chicago 2 years ago*


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That’s your preference and I put my preference out there. You like one state and I like the other. So be it.

At the end of the day, Missouri will be fine.

Unfortunately, the worst state in the union is all of them.

It does seem recently like ballot referendums are pretty much worthless unless passed as amendments. Legislators just overturn the public and face zero backlash.

chriss752 wrote: ↑

Mar 25, 2021

Why would anyone want to be part of a state with one of the worst pension crises in the country, is bankrupt, has crap infrastructure, continuing to lose population throughout the state, a history of corrupt politicians in Springfield, and a billionaire Governor that looks like Jabba the Hutt? 

Because I know that my daughter, wife, girlfriend, mother, grand mother etc. will have autonomy over her body and that women's health and women's rights are human rights.
Because my LGBTQ family members will be protected under the laws of the state like human beings should.
Because I know that when I go to a BLM protest, and someone tries to run me down in their car, they will go to prison. 
Because I know that angry people can't just buy a gun and immediately take possession and act impulsively. Because I know they have a 24-72 hour cooling off period.
Because I know that people cannot buy guns without first going through a fairly intense background check with the state police.
Because I know that I will not be considered a criminal if I decide I want to try marijuana.
Because although my infrastructure is in poor shape. my state manages to raise gas and cigarette taxes in proportion so these things can be paid for.

Should I go on? 

Despite the struggles you cite, Chicago still sucks in young people from every major college in the midwest like a vacuum. Meanwhile, StL struggles to retain SLU students. 

I went to U of I, and I had many friends and acquaintances who graduated jobless and refused to consider looking for work in StL because, "Although I like StL, I just can't bring myself to live in Missouri." 

BellaVilla wrote: ↑

Mar 25, 2021

chriss752 wrote: ↑

Mar 25, 2021

Why would anyone want to be part of a state with one of the worst pension crises in the country, is bankrupt, has crap infrastructure, continuing to lose population throughout the state, a history of corrupt politicians in Springfield, and a billionaire Governor that looks like Jabba the Hutt? 

Because I know that my daughter, wife, girlfriend, mother, grand mother etc. will have autonomy over her body and that women's health and women's rights are human rights.
Because my LGBTQ family members will be protected under the laws of the state like human beings should.
Because I know that when I go to a BLM protest, and someone tries to run me down in their car, they will go to prison. 
Because I know that angry people can't just buy a gun and immediately take possession and act impulsively. Because I know they have a 24-72 hour cooling off period.
Because I know that people cannot buy guns without first going through a fairly intense background check with the state police.
Because I know that I will not be considered a criminal if I decide I want to try marijuana.
Because although my infrastructure is in poor shape. my state manages to raise gas and cigarette taxes in proportion so these things can be paid for.

Should I go on? 

Despite the struggles you cite, Chicago still sucks in young people from every major college in the midwest like a vacuum. Meanwhile, StL struggles to maintain SLU students. 

I went to U of I, and I had many friends and acquaintances who graduated jobless and refused to consider looking for work in StL because, "Although I like StL, I just can't bring myself to live in Missouri." 

No need to go on. All of those things are just what the people in Illinois want. They vote for it so they get what they get.

• I like Missouri because of the ability to buy whatever gun I want without needing a background check.
• I like Missouri because I can conceal carry without the potential of it being a state crime.
• I like Missouri because of low taxes.
• I like Missouri because it is home.

I honestly don't care about all the abortion talk and what not. It's old news in my view and the opinions of the pro- and anti-abortion crowds will always remain no matter what happens. It's one of those things that's pointless to debate.

What I think we can improve on here:

1. Protections should be in place for any type of protest, whether it be for Black Lives Matter, a conservative cause, or God knows what else. But, once the protest turns into a riot, there should be no protections in place and the rioters deserve whatever they get as a result off their actions.
2. Missouri should legalize marijuana anyway because people use it no matter what. It would be a good revenue source.
3. Democrats and Republicans should work to find more common ground because you know there is common ground in the rhetoric somewhere.

College students who move to Chicago, in my opinion, are just wasting their money. The cost to live there is outrageous in basically every category (rent, buying a home, taxes, if you have a car then gas, etc). Hell, in my opinion, anyone who moves there is wasting their money. But if you get a good job that pays well, go ahead. Move wherever you feel most at home (and for many people now, it's politically more than anything).

To be fully honest, I quite like it here in Missouri despite the way things are. We're just fine in my view. We have cities governed by democrats and a state government governed by republicans. We have wine and farming country along with dense urban areas with their own flairs and culture. We have great state parks and lovely city parks too. We're full of history from being under Spanish and French rule, being the Gateway to the West, the Civil War, Dred Scott decision, and more. We're a state that has seen a good chunk of it all. And despite the misgivings, everything seems to flow pretty well here at the end of the day.

It's all just a matter of opinion and choice, but I root my opinions in things that matter far more than politics and feelings of people of differing views. I think a lot of people wouldn't be so angry if they rooted their opinions and feelings in other things than just politics. Find common ground, show pride for your state, and live in it. Change it up if you like for political reasons, but in my view, those people are wrong.

chriss752 wrote: ↑

Mar 25, 2021

BellaVilla wrote: ↑

Mar 25, 2021

chriss752 wrote: ↑

Mar 25, 2021

Why would anyone want to be part of a state with one of the worst pension crises in the country, is bankrupt, has crap infrastructure, continuing to lose population throughout the state, a history of corrupt politicians in Springfield, and a billionaire Governor that looks like Jabba the Hutt? 

Because I know that my daughter, wife, girlfriend, mother, grand mother etc. will have autonomy over her body and that women's health and women's rights are human rights.
Because my LGBTQ family members will be protected under the laws of the state like human beings should.
Because I know that when I go to a BLM protest, and someone tries to run me down in their car, they will go to prison. 
Because I know that angry people can't just buy a gun and immediately take possession and act impulsively. Because I know they have a 24-72 hour cooling off period.
Because I know that people cannot buy guns without first going through a fairly intense background check with the state police.
Because I know that I will not be considered a criminal if I decide I want to try marijuana.
Because although my infrastructure is in poor shape. my state manages to raise gas and cigarette taxes in proportion so these things can be paid for.

Should I go on? 

Despite the struggles you cite, Chicago still sucks in young people from every major college in the midwest like a vacuum. Meanwhile, StL struggles to maintain SLU students. 

I went to U of I, and I had many friends and acquaintances who graduated jobless and refused to consider looking for work in StL because, "Although I like StL, I just can't bring myself to live in Missouri." 

No need to go on. All of those things are just what the people in Illinois want. (1) They vote for it so they get what they get.

• I like Missouri because of the ability to buy whatever gun I want without needing a background check.
• I like Missouri because I can conceal carry without the potential of it being a state crime.
• I like Missouri because of low taxes.
• I like Missouri because it is home.

(2) I honestly don't care about all the abortion talk and what not. It's old news in my view and the opinions of the pro- and anti-abortion crowds will always remain no matter what happens. It's one of those things that's pointless to debate.

What I think we can improve on here:

1. Protections should be in place for any type of protest, whether it be for Black Lives Matter, a conservative cause, or God knows what else. But, once the protest turns into a riot, there should be no protections in place and the rioters deserve whatever they get as a result off their actions.
2. Missouri should legalize marijuana anyway because people use it no matter what. It would be a good revenue source.
3. Democrats and Republicans should work to find more common ground because you know there is common ground in the rhetoric somewhere.

(3) College students who move to Chicago, in my opinion, are just wasting their money. The cost to live there is outrageous in basically every category (rent, buying a home, taxes, if you have a car then gas, etc). Hell, in my opinion, anyone who moves there is wasting their money. But if you get a good job that pays well, go ahead. Move wherever you feel most at home (and for many people now, it's politically more than anything).

(4) To be fully honest, I quite like it here in Missouri despite the way things are. We're just fine in my view. We have cities governed by democrats and a state government governed by republicans. We have wine and farming country along with dense urban areas with their own flairs and culture. We have great state parks and lovely city parks too. We're full of history from being under Spanish and French rule, being the Gateway to the West, the Civil War, Dred Scott decision, and more. We're a state that has seen a good chunk of it all. And despite the misgivings, everything seems to flow pretty well here at the end of the day.

(5) It's all just a matter of opinion and choice, but I root my opinions in things that matter far more than politics and feelings of people of differing views. I think a lot of people wouldn't be so angry if they rooted their opinions and feelings in other things than just politics. Find common ground, show pride for your state, and live in it. Change it up if you like for political reasons, but in my view, those people are wrong.

(1) Chris, the people of Missouri voted for Medicaid Expansion. They voted for re-districting. And now the legislature is circumventing the will of the people. The legislature tried to make Missouri a Right-to-Work state despite it being wildly unpopular among missourians. If you think things are the way they are in Missouri because "that's what the people want," you're not paying any attention

(2) This is a disappointingly flippant take about the destruction of more than half the country's fundamental right. I wish you'd reconsider these feelings. 

(3) They want to live there because its a world-class urban environment that is also a global center of business and full of young people. Also, your cost of living analysis misses the mark. Compared to America's other Alpha/World Class cities, Chicago is remarkably affordable.

(4) Our state legislature has basically refused to provide releif to farmers hurt by flooding the last five years. Our urban areas are not very urban. Our state parks a meh because they are woefully underfunded. 

(5) I chose St. Louis because it owns more real estate in my heart than anywhere else and its where my connections are. I embody what you describe in your final paragraph. But our backwards state legislature holds out state back every day. The MoLeg can't even get being a republican right! We are ranked 28th in the average state and local tax burden! https://wallethub.com/edu/best-worst-st ... payer/2416

BellaVilla wrote: ↑

Mar 25, 2021

(1) Chris, the people of Missouri voted for Medicaid Expansion. They voted for re-districting. And now the legislature is circumventing the will of the people. The legislature tried to make Missouri a Right-to-Work state despite it being wildly unpopular among missourians. If you think things are the way they are in Missouri because "that's what the people want," you're not paying any attention

(2) This is a disappointingly flippant take about the destruction of more than half the country's fundamental right. I wish you'd reconsider these feelings. 

(3) They want to live there because its a world-class urban environment that is also a global center of business and full of young people. Also, your cost of living analysis misses the mark. Compared to America's other Alpha/World Class cities, Chicago is remarkably affordable.

(4) Our state legislature has basically refused to provide releif to farmers hurt by flooding the last five years. Our urban areas are not very urban. Our state parks a meh because they are woefully underfunded. 

I chose St. Louis because it owns more real estate in my heart than 

1. I understand they voted for Medicaid Expansion and I believe that the State Legislature should uphold the vote. The redistricting rules were voted on again last year and have been set. When Right to Work was put up for a vote, it was shot down. Sometimes, a second vote is good to make something official and clarify stances, but the State Government should not move the elections for certain things to traditionally less-important elections in the hope of swaying an outcome. Just set a date and keep it. Remaining on the ballot initiative issue, the wording should be simple and not so wordy. Actually put in there what will happen if you vote for a measure and don't add in a bunch of other wordy crap to district people from the main point.
2. I don't reconsider my opinion on the abortion issue. Until we all die, people will be debating whether to restrict it or to make it on demand with not restrictions. It's the way things are on this issue and the debate goes no where. In my view, it's not for me to decide what people should and shouldn't do because honestly, privacy is better than anything. It's not my business to know what people want to do when it comes down to their own medical care. It should be private for everyone. Even if someone wants an abortion, fine. It goes against what I believe, but I don't need to know about if someone got an abortion and why. It's just not my business. So the debate over abortion, and other medical access debates, should come right down to that, do people value privacy or having their actions publicized and demonized? I'll choose privacy any day of the week over the nonsense from people on the left and right who want it one way or the other. Agree to privacy and let it be.
3. Chicago just isn't for me and people know that by now. I'll hate on it till I die. If the railroads chose St. Louis for their hub instead of Chicago back in the day, we'd be kicking their ass right now.
4. The least the state legislature could do is issue relief, but I'm not in power to propose that. Our urban areas are adequate for their size. St. Louis, more so than Kansas City, has the bones to become dense again but even if policies change at the local and state levels, it'll be decades till we restore the lost density.

I knew what I would say on here would be controversial and maybe cause some people to feel upset, but I put it out there anyway for the discussion that would come about. 

chriss752 wrote: ↑

Mar 25, 2021

• I like Missouri because of the ability to buy whatever gun I want without needing a background check.

I'm sorry, but this is absolutely nuts. We regulate other dangerous things. The only reason guns aren't regulated, despite being a public health crisis, is that the NRA and gun industry continuously distort the absurdly archaic 2nd amendment to brainwash those who romanticize revolution and the Wild West and litigate to safeguard their profits. They couldn't care less about your freedumb, or your life, or anyone else's life.

For the record, I own one gun and that's a shotgun. I bought it in August 2019 and, believe it or not, have yet to fire a single shot out of it.

If people want a background check, then please go ahead and implement one after a vote. Let the people decide the outcome instead of the politicians. And make it a constitutional amendment that cannot be changed. 

Would there be mudslinging? Yes. Would be it be expensive? Yes. But I'd feel better if the voters had a say in gun control legislation rather than a few elected people. In the event the voters pass a background check amendment as well as ban the sale of particular guns, myself along with a whole lot of other people would be fine with that. It's not that I'm against background checks. I'm just against them being implemented by politicians who always have their own agenda that gets in the way of anything meaningful.

Background checks can be good or bad, in my view. But the question I have is would they even prevent the events like we've seen in Georgia and Colorado?

Chris, why do you support terrorists being able to come to Missouri and buy a gun and murder you?

dbInSouthCity wrote: ↑

Mar 26, 2021

Chris, why do you support terrorists being able to come to Missouri and buy a gun and murder you?

You're putting words into my mouth. I don't support terrorists. I support law abiding people who have the rights to buy a gun of their choosing. 

Surely, you understand that there's a very slim chance that the people coming to buy guns here are criminals with the intention of murder. Criminals are smarter than we all think and will buy a gun to murder someone on the black market or via trade on the streets and in the shadows. Mostly because when an investigation is launched into a heinous crime, like we saw in Colorado and Georgia recently, and if said criminal/suspect bought a gun at a gun store, investigators can back trace among other things. When I bought my shot gun, the serial number was written down on the receipt that I have as well as the sale document for the seller I bought it from. A cop friend of mine said that gun dealers write serial numbers down so that in the event of an investigation where a gun is found with a serial number, the investigators can back trace and review other information on the sale document. However though, the documentation of serial numbers to owners is not widespread at this point in time. If it's an illegal gun, which is typically used in crime, the serial numbers can be ground off or the gun got into the criminal's hands as a result of previous robbery. 

So, I'm not concerned about people coming to Missouri to buy a gun because I feel 99.9% confident that they're not going to turn around and use that purchase to murder me, you or anyone else. A huge majority of gun owners mean no harm to people, it's the small percentage within the gun ownership group that means harm and moves other people to classify all gun owners as "a type of terrorist".

In the event a background check is passed, maybe it'll kick out the potential bad guys and leave people with no problems being able to have their gun, but not all bad guys will be found. Those bad guys, and the sale of guns in the shadows for crime, is what we need to focus on more than anything else. We can even ban all guns and I guarantee that crime, both murder and otherwise, will still take place and include guns as primary weapons. 

Criminals = terrorists, meaning that they do not care about the law.

chriss752 wrote: ↑

Mar 26, 2021

So, I'm not concerned about people coming to Missouri to buy a gun because I feel 99.9% confident that they're not going to turn around and use that purchase to murder me, you or anyone else. A huge majority of gun owners mean no harm to people, it's the small percentage within the gun ownership group that means harm and moves other people to classify all gun owners as "a type of terrorist".

Chris, you're just empirically, verifiably wrong. I'm sorry. Please have a read: https://www.jhsph.edu/news/news-releases/2014/repeal-of-missouris-background-law-associated-with-increase-in-states-murders.html. A similar study found that regulations enacted in Connecticut reduced gun crimes by up to 40%: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4504296/. If the NRA would stop litigating to prevent the CDC from researching the US gun death epidemic (gee, I wonder why the gun lobby and gun manufacturers don't want guns revealed as the cancer that they are) I guarantee you there would be a hundred more studies reinforcing these results. Nothing about background checks or strong regulation prevents "law abiding citizens" from buying guns. But there is a very clear correlation between # guns per household and # gun deaths by state:


https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/07/gun-owners-study-one-in-three/

This is from 2013. I've seen a more recent one that puts MO right up at the top with Wyoming, Idaho, and Alaska. Will try to track it down. By your logic, we should allow anyone of any age to buy and drive a vehicle of any type without any sort of testing or licensing. Wanna buy and drive a tank around? Sure thing, 'cause you're a "law abiding citizen" so what could go wrong!

EDIT: Here's the chart I was thinking of, from the NY Times:

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/11/06/opinion/how-to-reduce-shootings.html