The ten most financially sound states in the country....... (illegal, health care, Missouri)

[doc1]

"The report — “Ranking the States by Fiscal Condition” — used official government data to measure the states’ ability to pay short-term bills and meet longer-term obligations, such as public pensions or health care costs, using five separate measures......."

"........States can do well on some measures and poorly on others. Alaska, for example, ranks at the top for cash, budget and long-run solvency, but near the bottom on the other two measures. Ohio ranks fifth in cash solvency, but 48th on trust fund solvency. This year’s report includes Puerto Rico, which scored dead last on every measure....."



Best-Run States Are Heavily Republican, Study Finds | Stock News & Stock Market Analysis - IBD

[saltine]

No surprise. Soon a leftie will be along to tell you how dumb those states are.

[tinytrump]

Originally Posted by doc1

"The report — “Ranking the States by Fiscal Condition” — used official government data to measure the states’ ability to pay short-term bills and meet longer-term obligations, such as public pensions or health care costs, using five separate measures......."

"........States can do well on some measures and poorly on others. Alaska, for example, ranks at the top for cash, budget and long-run solvency, but near the bottom on the other two measures. Ohio ranks fifth in cash solvency, but 48th on trust fund solvency. This year’s report includes Puerto Rico, which scored dead last on every measure....."



Best-Run States Are Heavily Republican, Study Finds | Stock News & Stock Market Analysis - IBD

yea by the stock market on election year- I just posted the poorest states are republican in another "study" non-election year- and I think It was Pew? phhss just taking a break from cutting my yard to go look now- but I posted it on another thread---

[Northeastah]

does the financial well-being/soundness of a state factor in their dependency on federal aid?

https://wallethub.com/edu/states-mos...vernment/2700/

Top 10 most dependent states
Mississippi
New Mexico
Alabama
Louisiana
Tennessee
Montana
South Dakota
Kentucky
West Virginia
Missouri

[Northeastah]

Top 10 States That Rely Most on Federal Aid

The 10 states receiving the most in federal aid as a percentage of their general revenue, in order, were:

Mississippi, 42.9% federal aid as percentage of general revenue
Louisiana, 41.9%
Tennessee, 39.5%
South Dakota, 39.0%
Missouri, 38.2%
Montana, 37.4%
Georgia, 37.3%
New Mexico, 36.6%
Alabama, 36.1%
Maine, 35.3%

At the other end, the 10 states receiving the least in federal aid as a percentage of their general revenues were:

40. Illinois, 25.9%

41. New Jersey, 25.5%

42. California, 25.0%

43. Nevada, 25.0%

44. Kansas, 24.9%

45. Delaware, 24.8%

46. Connecticut, 23.4%

47. Virginia, 22.9%

48. Alaska, 22.4%

49. Hawaii, 21.5%

50. North Dakota, 19.0%

[steven_h]

Originally Posted by Northeastah

does the financial well-being/soundness of a state factor in their dependency on federal aid?

https://wallethub.com/edu/states-mos...vernment/2700/

Top 10 most dependent states
Mississippi
New Mexico
Alabama
Louisiana
Tennessee
Montana
South Dakota
Kentucky
West Virginia
Missouri

You're adding variables to deflect, which is exactly what saltine said would happen and boom...the very next post. Too funny.

Louisiana with a budget of $49.2B spends just 1B (2.05%) of their budget on welfare.
California with a budget of $502B spends over $36B (6.2%) of their budget on welfare.

I know, so many hard numbers and facts can be frustrating.

Moving on:

Let's look at other sub-categories as well.

States with the highest % on food stamps per capita:
5. Oregon
• Number of food stamp recipients: 791,222
• Percentage of the state's population on food stamps: 19.93%
• Total cost of just these benefits alone (That is, how much do just the money on those EBT cards cost the state?): Around $98 million
• Cost of benefits alone per capita in this state: $24.66 per person
4. West Virginia
• Number of food stamp recipients: 369,249
• Percentage of the state's population on food stamps: 19.96%
• Total cost of just these benefits alone (That is, how much do just the money on those EBT cards cost the state?): Around $45.7 million
• Cost of benefits alone per capita in this state: $24.69 per person
3. New Mexico
• Number of food stamp recipients: 448,328
• Percentage of the state's population on food stamps: 21.5%
• Total cost of just these benefits alone (That is, how much do just the money on those EBT cards cost the state?): Around $55.5 million
• Cost of benefits alone per capita in this state: $26.60 per person
2. Mississippi
• Number of food stamp recipients: 650,911
• Percentage of the state's population on food stamps: 21.74%
• Total cost of just these benefits alone (That is, how much do just the money on those EBT cards cost the state?): Around $80.5 million
• Estimated cost of benefits alone per capita in this state: $26.90 per person
1. District of Columbia
• Number of food stamp recipients: 144,768
• Percentage of the state's population on food stamps: 21.97%
• Total cost of just these benefits alone (That is, how much do just the money on those EBT cards cost the state?): Around $18 million
• Estimated cost of benefits alone per capita in this state: $27.19 per person

Let's talk about cost per person in the top worst states:

California took 37B in Federal welfare last year!


California by far spends more than any other state on welfare. But broken down on a per-capita basis, the story is a little different. That overall figure amounts to $179 annually for every man, woman and child in California. That trails New York ($256) and Hawaii ($233)

These are the most telling data points. Louisiana may be in the top 5 of your Fed nipple list, but they also cost each resident 90% less to support their welfare programs. Little old Louisiana manages their state better than CA, NY and HI, as the OP suggests.





Comparing the smallest (and typically poorer states) as a percentage of capita on welfare is dishonest. It's simply using percentages rather than hard numbers to produce deceptive results. Using JUST federal dollars is even more dishonest because it ignores what the states themselves are investing into their programs.

CA, FL, OH, and much of the north and northeastern states (large population centers) with some of the highest GDP are in the highest percentile of welfare spending as a percentage of GDP, and THAT is why those states languish in debt. <<< THAT is what the premise of this thread is about, and these are hard figures which can't be whitewashed with deceptive sidetracking.

[thecoalman]

Originally Posted by Northeastah

does the financial well-being/soundness of a state factor in their dependency on federal aid?

https://wallethub.com/edu/states-mos...vernment/2700/

This has been repeatedly debunked. Take New Mexico for example which is "blue - purplish". There is a huge amount of federal facilities there. Sandia National lab by itself will add $1250 per capita of "federal aid".

[Frank DeForrest]

Originally Posted by Northeastah

does the financial well-being/soundness of a state factor in their dependency on federal aid?

https://wallethub.com/edu/states-mos...vernment/2700/

Top 10 most dependent states
Mississippi
New Mexico
Alabama
Louisiana
Tennessee
Montana
South Dakota
Kentucky
West Virginia
Missouri

You mean states getting their own taxpayers money back?

[thecoalman]

Originally Posted by Northeastah

Mississippi, 42.9% federal aid as percentage of general revenue

What we got here is a failure to understand math.

If you have low state taxes the federal percentage is necessarily higher.

[nmnita]

Can't judge by federal aid; nor are these studies really indicative of much. If you take a small rural state with one very poor region, it brings the entire state down. This also is the case in larger states with a very low income metro area. Usually these states have a lot of poverty, people on welfare and illegals, but that does not pertain to the entire state. Look at California for starters.