Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
They will not spend the money (most of it given to them by the feds) on helping the homeless, electric grid infrastructure, low income housing, improving port throughput, drug addiction, failed inner-city schools, urban blight, crime fighting, traffic gridlock, ect.. Why?
Because they only care about themselves, & they are wealthy enough to avoid most of the issues common to so many of their fellow statesmen.
They have NO compassion for other people in need...that is why Dems give so little to charity, as a political block, compared to Pubs.
There's the haves, and the have-nots, & the haves are as selfish as they come....which is the Liberal way.
Me, myself, & I...remember how many times Obama used to say "I"? He's their role model.
It's a shame to waste such a beautiful state on some self-centered rich egomaniacs who see those outside their inner sphere as worthless human scum.
No wonder millions are fleeing California, & fewer are moving in....Thousands of employers too.
Well they taxed me to he!! and I have nothing to show for it and everything is worse than it used to be so I call it a fail. I'd be happier if I got to keep the money myself.
California got $44 billion in Federal aid.....the most of any state by a long shot....2/3 of that $68 billion was from the Feds
...the state that got the second most was Texas....with $23 billion....half of what California got
Texas actually got $27 Billion.
"Virginia has the highest net federal funding per resident at $10,301 per resident. ***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."
The total funding numbers are meaningless unless you know the resident numbers.
"The ten states with the lowest net federal funding per resident are:
New Jersey (-$2,368)
Massachusetts (-$2,343)
New York (-$1,792)
North Dakota (-$720)
Illinois (-$364)
New Hampshire (-$234)
Washington (-$184)
Nebraska (-$164)
Colorado (-$95) California ($12)
the 10 states with the most federal funding per resident:
Virginia ($10,301)
Kentucky ($9,145)
New Mexico ($8,692)
West Virginia ($7,283)
Alaska ($7,048)
Mississippi ($6,880)
Alabama ($6,694)
Maryland ($6,035)
Maine ($5,572)
Hawaii ($5,270)" https://worldpopulationreview.com/st...l-aid-by-state
I love California. I'm traveling to another state this weekend for vacation, but I'll be happy to come back to California when the weekend is over.
And those from other states appreciate that. ;-)
There are some fine people living in Ca. The problem is they’re outnumbered and therefore outvoted. There are ex-Californians living in plenty of other states. Some have screwed things up for other cities or states and some haven’t. Plenty of friends and family of mine have moved out of the state in recent decades for obvious reasons.
Ca. doesn't have a great rep with most flyover states. Born and raised in Southern California it is nothing like it once was. Perhaps you’re not old enough to appreciate the contrast over multiple decades.
There are some fine people living in Ca. The problem is they’re outnumbered and therefore outvoted. There are ex-Californians living in plenty of other states. Some have screwed things up for other cities or states and some haven’t. Plenty of friends and family of mine have moved out of the state in recent decades for obvious reasons.
Ca. doesn't have a great rep with most flyover states. Born and raised in Southern California it is nothing like it once was. Perhaps you’re not old enough to appreciate the contrast over multiple decades.
California doesn't have a $68B surplus, We have a $100B deficit because of unfunded pension liabilities. Unlike private businesses that have to meet minimum funding requirements for pensions they owe their employees, because CA is a government they are exempt from ERISA 1974. That doesn't mean they don't owe the money, it means they can hide it. If CA were required to put that money aside now, like private business ism we'd be way underwater.
It is like buying a $20,000,000 oceanfront home, a Rolls Royce and having parties every night serving Dom Perignon and putting it all on a credit card. You think you are rich, you are living like you are rich, but you aren't rich. Sooner or later that bill comes due.
This!
And how could California have a growing surplus with fewer taxpayers ie people leaving
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
