The Republican Utopia

[DevoHusker]

25 minutes ago, Dr. Strangelove said:

I'm referring to the federal taxes states pay compared to what they receive in federal money.

 

It should come as no surprise that red states get more in federal money than they pay (states like California and New York subsidize states like Kentucky and Alabama)

 

https://www.baltimoresun.com/maryland/carroll/opinion/cc-op-zirpoli-050620-20200506-7ya7okjfk5btdpysnrnrfouyz4-story.html.

 

I think it's time those states pick themselves up by their bootstraps. Furthermore, when we have two countries, we should build a wall around the blue states to keep the poor red staters out. We can round them up with guys on horseback and send those leeches back to the states they came. 

 

We can set up a repayment plan for all the federal money they've sucked up, the interest on which can be marginal. 

California has roughly 40 million residents. Kentucky and Alabama have 10 million combined.

[DevoHusker]

3 hours ago, nic said:

You peaked my curiosity. Are you talking about not paying federal income taxes, or how much federal money each state gets? I would almost think that the amount of federal money a state get depends on which party is in power at the federal level.

https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/federal-aid-by-state

 

Net federal funding per resident is the amount that a state received per capita from the government minus the amount that residents and organizations paid the government per capita.

Virginia has the highest net federal funding per resident at $10,301 per resident. Unlike the previously mentioned trend, Virginia receives disproportionately high federal aid despite being one of the U.S.'s wealthier states. This could be attributed to their large defense contracting sectors.

On the opposite end, some states have negative net federal funding. These states have paid to the federal government in taxes more than they receive back in aid. New Jersey has the largest negative net federal funding of -$2,368 per resident, followed by Massachusetts with -$2,343 per resident.

[Scarlet]

1 hour ago, DevoHusker said:

California has roughly 40 million residents. Kentucky and Alabama have 10 million combined.

Per capita

 

Quote

A 2017 study by the Rockefeller Institute of Government found that traditional blue states like Connecticut ($15,643), Massachusetts ($13,582), New Jersey ($13,137), New York ($12,820), and California ($10,510), contributed significantly more in federal taxes, per citizen, than traditional red states like Mississippi ($5,740), West Virginia ($6,349), Kentucky ($6,626), and South Carolina ($6,665).

 

[nic]

2 hours ago, Dr. Strangelove said:

I'm referring to the federal taxes states pay compared to what they receive in federal money.

 

It should come as no surprise that red states get more in federal money than they pay (states like California and New York subsidize states like Kentucky and Alabama)

 

https://www.baltimoresun.com/maryland/carroll/opinion/cc-op-zirpoli-050620-20200506-7ya7okjfk5btdpysnrnrfouyz4-story.html.

 

I think it's time those states pick themselves up by their bootstraps. Furthermore, when we have two countries, we should build a wall around the blue states to keep the poor red staters out. We can round them up with guys on horseback and send those leeches back to the states they came. 

 

We can set up a repayment plan for all the federal money they've sucked up, the interest on which can be marginal. 

Seems like more people are leaving blue states for red states these days and places like part of Oregon, Washington, and Northern Cali have tried to get petitions to join Idaho. I need to read the the data. If the federal funding data is for the last 4 years of Trump, but moves based on who is in charge (with some lag) it makes sense. It also makes sense that Cali and NY, pay more taxes....richer folks there than Kentucky for sure.

[Dr. Strangelove]

1 hour ago, nic said:

Seems like more people are leaving blue states for red states these days and places like part of Oregon, Washington, and Northern Cali have tried to get petitions to join Idaho. I need to read the the data. If the federal funding data is for the last 4 years of Trump, but moves based on who is in charge (with some lag) it makes sense. It also makes sense that Cali and NY, pay more taxes....richer folks there than Kentucky for sure.

Demographic shifts are interesting, although I don't think the reasons people are moving to southern states are political. It has to do with cost of living, job opportunities, etc.

 

I do think an argument can be made that things like CoL have something to do with politics, but if people were leaving for political reasons the states they're moving to wouldn't be turning blue (Arizona, Georgia, Virginia,  Colorado). The states they're leaving are turning more and more red (Ohio, Iowa, Wisconsin). 

 

I agree that the wealthy folks in California should pay more in taxes. My problem with the citizens of Red states is that they complain about government spending they benefit more from it. 

 

I was being sarcastic because as a whole, Red states rely on blue states.  Not the other way around. If a split between Red and Blue happened, the Blue states would be much better off and the Red states much poorer.

[Dr. Strangelove]

3 hours ago, DevoHusker said:

I posted similar elsewhere. Did you note that 41% of Dems think the same...?

Yes, however, in my sarcastic post I was trying to convey that the Red states need the money from blue states and not the other way around, which is why I'm amused at the red states. The voters are stupid and don't realize how much they massively benefit from the arrangement. 

[nic]

13 hours ago, Dr. Strangelove said:

Demographic shifts are interesting, although I don't think the reasons people are moving to southern states are political. It has to do with cost of living, job opportunities, etc.

 

I do think an argument can be made that things like CoL have something to do with politics, but if people were leaving for political reasons the states they're moving to wouldn't be turning blue (Arizona, Georgia, Virginia,  Colorado). The states they're leaving are turning more and more red (Ohio, Iowa, Wisconsin). 

 

I agree that the wealthy folks in California should pay more in taxes. My problem with the citizens of Red states is that they complain about government spending they benefit more from it. 

 

I was being sarcastic because as a whole, Red states rely on blue states.  Not the other way around. If a split between Red and Blue happened, the Blue states would be much better off and the Red states much poorer.

Well Virginia is #1, New Mexico#3, Maryland and Hawaii are the top 10. I would like to see a breakdown of the funding. I also tried to look up 2016 to test my other theory, but no luck. Not sure why Virginia is up there. New Mexico and some of the southern states seem like they might be welfare related. The 2022 election will be interesting.

 

Edit: I thought about this more. If it’s welfare I am in for cutting it off and educating folks instead. Not university education, trades or tech school. Someplace where they can learn something practical. Or bring in some manufacturing instead and create some jobs where people can have gain some self worth and achieve something.

[Archy1221]

Doesn’t the military institutions and number bases affect the spending number for the states? If you took those dollar amounts out and reworked the numbers, would they look as bad?  
 

[Scarlet]

Checks all the nebulous fear mongering catch phrases while conveniently forgetting about the Constitution.  

[nic]

On 10/2/2021 at 7:25 AM, Archy1221 said:

Doesn’t the military institutions and number bases affect the spending number for the states? If you took those dollar amounts out and reworked the numbers, would they look as bad?  
 

I wonder if Maryland and Virginia being high has to do with proximity to DC. The $$ DC spends probably leaks out to the neighbors. 

[knapplc]

 

 

[DevoHusker]

 

 

[deedsker]

https://www.axios.com/jeff-fortenberry-fbi-c3b5c105-025f-4e73-a945-a5f2e2260318.html
 

That was fast 

 

 

[knapplc]

Banning books in Texas because 444 parents out of a district of 90,000 students have concerns about "critical race theory."

 

 

 

[Dr. Strangelove]

On 10/1/2021 at 8:08 PM, nic said:

Well Virginia is #1, New Mexico#3, Maryland and Hawaii are the top 10. I would like to see a breakdown of the funding. I also tried to look up 2016 to test my other theory, but no luck. Not sure why Virginia is up there. New Mexico and some of the southern states seem like they might be welfare related. The 2022 election will be interesting.

 

Edit: I thought about this more. If it’s welfare I am in for cutting it off and educating folks instead. Not university education, trades or tech school. Someplace where they can learn something practical. Or bring in some manufacturing instead and create some jobs where people can have gain some self worth and achieve something.

It depends on if you're talking raw federal spending - including government jobs. In that instance, a state like Virginia is #1 because if DC.

 

If you refer to welfare dollars, which is what I'm taking about, it's the government sending states money and not getting things in return. The number 1 state is a blue state,  New Mexico, but the next 9 states are red as well as 13 of the top 15. Because states like Alabama, Mississippi, Arkansas, Kentucky, Oklahoma, etc. have a lot of poor residents. 

 

As far as retraining, the government has provided programs with limited success. They've tried to retrain coal miners in West Virginia to learn new skills, for example, but when given the option to pick from over 100 new skills - paid for by the government - they chose coal mining. Stories are similar for other depresses areas in the country as well.  (https://www.google.com/amp/s/mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN1D14G0)