Red State Moochers (McCain, Congress, Canada, ideology)
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.
The poster I was responding to blamed liberals wanting handouts. How are "libiots" responsible for conservative states taking more money in federal tax dollars?
Try to follow me here, most common sense people understand that there's no such thing as a red state or blue state since states are typically close to a 50/50 split or within a couple points in either direction. Sure some lean one way or the other but no state is 100% or even 80% red or blue. Tea Party members in red states know that liberals have created victim communities in their states. Here in my red state of TX we have a huge influx of illegal immigration which is a huge drain on our social services, that's an issue clearly supported by "blue" politicians. In the "red" state of Louisiana you have victim communities like New Orleans which have been created and maintained by blue politicians.
So basically you did the calculations of ratios yourself? No thanks.
I'll trust the experts at the Tax Foundation and use their 2006 data. I'm not going to trust some right wing partisan who does his calculations from data that may or may not be adequate, possibly leaving something out, all done on the back of a envelope....LOL
The sources are the exact same ones used by the Tax Foundation. Are you saying the Census and IRS have right wing partisan agendas? LOL.
Well the libs move to conservative states and sit around and don't work thus taking in more in welfare and benifits from the government to said state. Its obvious unless your eyes are closed.
Look at the parishes that went blue, areas like New Orleans which went 80% for Obama while the rest of the state is clearly red. New Orleans is/was the largest victim society you could find in this country, people living their entire lives in gov. housing and on gov. assistance and it's overwhelmingly blue.
The sources are the exact same ones used by the Tax Foundation. Are you saying the Census and IRS have right wing partisan agendas? LOL.
Someone break out the tin foil hats.
No not at all, those links you gave are valid objective sources.
The problem is you. You're not fair enough or qualified enough to run those numbers.
Just a quick history of your posts will prove this to most people.
Those ratios use all sorts of data. You don't know if something needs to be held back, accounted for, carried over, etc. You don't know if you have all the data the Tax Foundation used to compile their ratios.
The FACT of the matter is the data from 2006 will not differ greatly different from 2008 in all probabilty.
No not at all those links you gave are valid objective sources.
The problem is you. You're not fair enough or qualified enough to run those numbers.
Just a quick history of your posts will prove this to most people.
Those ratios use all sorts of data. You don't know if something needs to be held back, accounted for, carried over, etc. You don't know if you have all the data the Tax Foundation used to compile their ratios.
The FACT of the matter is the data from 2006 will not differ greatly different from 2008 in all probabilty.
No not at all those links you gave are valid objective sources.
Good so far.
Quote:
Originally Posted by padcrasher
The problem is you. You're not fair enough or qualified enough to run those numbers.
Then you do it yourself. Open up an excel spreadsheet, open up the reports and see for yourself. Simple copy and paste operation, then divide to find the ratio, subtract income from spending to find the deficit. Hell, find an objective person to pawn the work off onto if you want to make sure it is perfect.
In fact, if you find a single discrepancy between the Census data and the IRS data, I will own up to it right here and concede that I was wrong. In fact, here is the excel chart:
Quote:
Originally Posted by padcrasher
Those ratios use all sorts of data. You don't know if something needs to be held back, accounted for, carried over, etc. You don't know if you have all the data the Tax Foundation used to compile their ratios.
You saw the Tax Foundation information same as I did, their ratios align perfectly between the IRS data and the Census data from 2006. They did not make adjustments, the data is straight forward.
Quote:
Originally Posted by padcrasher
The FACT of the matter is the data from 2006 will not differ greatly different from 2008 in all probabilty.
Dude, the economy came tumbling down throughout 2008 and a good part of 2009. Tax revenues plummeted, federal spending increased, and the unemployment rate skyrocketed in most states. You can see how much different the data is from 2004, when the popular "Red State Socialism" chart you used to spam on these forums was made. 2006 was essentially the peak of the economic cycle for most states.
Quote:
Originally Posted by padcrasher
So you are far off base.
Therein lies the problem. It is not the data or facts setting you off, it is a personal problem you have with me. Grow the hell up.
I think I would be happy to vote for less taxes then. My state is about balanced in total tax revenue and really needs no federal subsidies, I make a high income, I should keep more of my money then paying it out to other states. Who needs the propaganda of welfare queen from Reagan's dog whistle politics about those evil liberals (that no one can seem to find), when you can see in black and white the big moocher states?
Sink or swim West Virgina and Mississippi, the wealthy are cutting you off!
Red states tend to receive more Federal revenue than they pay in taxes. Are the exceptions? Sure.
Bitter white right wingers whining about the Federal spending when they are making out like bandits.
All the more reason to elect republicans, no? Only an idiot would vote democrat if they can't even 'bring home the bacon' for their constituents at a breakeven level.
Take Illinois for example (because I live in this cesspool). We've been hijacked by democrats for years and have one of the worst returns on our $$ out of the 50 states. What's the incentive to keep electing these morons? So our budget will become more bloated while less and less of our federal $'s come back to our state? NTY.
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.
