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.
Saw this on another wedsite and thought I'd share.
For all the crap about small govt, self-sufficiency welfare cheats and other right wing delusions, the fact is that the red states are Easy Riders living off of the Blue states. And they have less concern for their citizens, worse social behavior etc. In other words, in good old psychology terms they Bush states are what they blame the blue states for being. Here is one example. Others will follow
The Tax Foundation - Tax Research Areas > Federal Taxes Paid vs. Spending Received by State (http://www.taxfoundation.org/taxingspending.html - broken link)
(see the site for tables as they did not copy well.)
October 7, 2004
Federal Taxing and Spending Benefit Some States, Leave Others Paying Bill
New Mexico gets $1.99 for every dollar in taxes, New Jersey only 57 cents
WASHINGTON, D.C.—Some states feast at the expense of others, according to the Tax Foundation’s latest annual analysis of federal taxing and spending patterns.
All taxpayers know that the federal government uses tax and spending policy to redistribute income from citizens with high incomes to those who make little, but citizens are less aware about geographically based income redistribution. Tax Foundation Senior Economist Scott Moody compares the federal tax burden in each state with Census Bureau data (2003) on federal spending in each state. The result is a ranking of which states got the best deal in 2003 from Uncle Sam’s tax and spending policies.
Federally Favored States
“During fiscal 2003, taxpayers in New Mexico benefited the most from the give-and-take with Uncle Sam,” said Moody. New Mexico received $1.99 in federal outlays for every $1.00 the state’s taxpayers sent to Uncle Sam. Other big winners were Alaska ($1.89), Mississippi ($1.83), and West Virginia ($1.82). (See tables below).
States That Help Others
If some states are beneficiaries, then naturally some must be benefactors—those states where so much is collected in federal taxes that any federal spending they receive is overwhelmed.....
Combining the third highest tax burden per capita with the ninth lowest federal spending, New Jersey had the lowest federal spending-to-tax ratio (57¢). Other states that had low federal spending-to-tax ratios in FY 2003 are New Hampshire (64¢), Connecticut (65¢), Minnesota (70¢), Nevada (70¢), and Illinois (73¢).
Changing Ranks
The state that raised its ratio the most over the past ten years is Alaska where federal spending rose from $1.30 to $1.89 for each dollar in taxes. This 59-cent increase beats out Alabama, where federal spending increased 35¢ per dollar of tax, West Virginia (33¢ more spending per dollar), and Kentucky (32¢ more spending per dollar).
States where the ratio dropped most are Colorado and Massachusetts. Colorado has seen its federal spending-to-tax ratio fall 20¢ from $1.00 in FY 1994 to 80¢ in FY 2003. Massachusetts’s has dropped 18¢.
What Affects Rankings?
Federal spending on defense and other procurement dollars are often funneled to the states of powerful Members of Congress, and state governments can grab more federal grant money by skillfully manipulating their spending to comply with federal regulations.
However, demography may be more influential than politics. States with more residents on Social Security, Medicare and other large federal entitlements are bound to rank fairly high. Similarly, the high spending levels in Virginia, Maryland and the District of Columbia are explained by the predominance of federal employees.
On the tax side of the equation, states with higher incomes per capita—New Jersey stands out—pay much higher federal taxes per capita because of the income tax’s progressive structure. The citizens in these high-income, high-tax states do not always live better or save more than people in low-income, low-tax states because the cost of living is usually that much higher or more. __________________
"The moral of this story is not the danger for Obama going forward with his Gitmo decommissioning, the moral is that when venal, shallow, small men are given unfettered power and authority, they do incompetent, stupid, and evil things."
John Cole
People living in states with high state and local income taxes get a deduction for those taxes paid. Northerners will get the home heating tax credit. I suppose there are a lot of reasons the tax burden could vary among red and blue states, but Ronnie and I don't care as long as you blue state people stay out of our red states.
The article mentions New Mexico as being the greatest consumer of federal resources per capita. I live in New Mexico. It's as to the left as the state I used to live in, New Jersey. They own both houses on the state level, and both U.S. Senators and three U.S. House of Representative seats, as well as the governorship. Obama won this state handily in the last presidential election. And there are many, many people here on government assistance here. And they all vote their pocketbooks here. Their main belief, in this vain, is to vote themselves higher welfare, food stamps, section 8 housing, and Medicaid benefits. Wealth envy is in high gear in this state, to be sure.
I would ebt teh number of people on welfare is much greater in the blue states and in the democrtic party by a large margin.Just as large cities account for 20% oif people in poverty and get 80% of the moeny to thepoor from federal government.Heck some staes even have adults on the CVHIPS program designed for children.That comes directoly from Bill Clinton's foundation on poverty.
The Tax Foundation - Tax Research Areas > Federal Taxes Paid vs. Spending Received by State (http://www.taxfoundation.org/taxingspending.html - broken link)
(see the site for tables as they did not copy well.)
Not surprised at all, I lived in Missouri and Kansas and I always wondered how so many small towns in the middle of nowhere (what republicans call "real americans") could afford to have a fleet of brand new Dodge Magnums.
I found this nifty map which shows last year's tax revenue vs federal payouts which shows that just showing just 17 states pay a net amount of taxes to the Federal government while the other 33 basically suck from the government's teat. Just one, count it one, red state actually pays net taxes (Texas). The rest are all screaming welfare queens sucking up our tax dollars.
Like I said before I wouldn't mind so much supporting the less well off if they weren't so nasty all the time to those of us who do pay for their free meal. If the jackasses in those states weren't constantly screaming about the negroes... Opps I mean "the urban poor"... taking all their dollars, and by their dollars, they mean the dollars of people from urban areas that are given to them by the evil government.
People living in states with high state and local income taxes get a deduction for those taxes paid. Northerners will get the home heating tax credit. I suppose there are a lot of reasons the tax burden could vary among red and blue states, but Ronnie and I don't care as long as you blue state people stay out of our red states.
How about you welfare queens in red states stop sucking up all of our (meaning blue state) tax dollars and actually pay your own ways? I guess "personal accountability" is for other people, eh?
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.
