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.
If you want to change the subject to the failed stimulus you'll need to present more recent data on taxes paid.
But with or without that, why would you assume the federal government's spending is directly related to the size of a state's population?
The federal government spends money to maintain its own property throughout the US. This is why DC's ratio is six to one. Do you really think DC residents get a return on their taxes from the federal government six times the rate of FL?
Um, when did I? Though technically 1 man, 1 vote, it should be 1 man, 1 dollar, shouldn't it? Unfortunately, the red states that hate income re-distribution are benefitting from income re-distribution as blue state tax dollars are funnelled en mase to red states. Give us our money back plz, socialist red states.
I misread your title, I guess. Somehow I wonder how the people in the blue states would eat at any trough without the food that the red states provide. Can you explain that to me? I didn't think so. Wait until the blues secede and see how much the tariffs raise your food prices.
Actually I'd think you'd be surprise at the level of agribculture in Blue States and swing states.
Red states definitely lead and meat and chicken production.
This doesn't get into fruits and other vegatables many of which Blue States lead in or are near the top in terms of production.
Everyone seems to have missed the point that Federal spending in Blue States is assumed to be going to individual welfare and Federal spending in Red States is going to honest hard working agricultural and petroleum monopolies and banks. Supporting individuals needing help is considered unworthy but subsidizing prosperous farms and industries is a good use of surplus tax money from the Blue States to the deserving Red States.
I consider the fact that little New Hampshire, as conservative, but apparently not neo-conservative, as you can get, cannot afford to maintain its own State park system but still sends $1.78 to the Federal Government for each $1.00 it receives in Federal spending. New Mexico, of similar population and vastly larger size, receives about $2.00 per $1.00. I wonder what the New Hampshire Congressional delegation is doing wrong. Get off your collective arses folks and get us some more pork.
If I live in Cheyenne, how do I benefit from the money the federal government spends on Yellowstone? Do the residents of WY periodically get a Yellowstone check in the mail? That money benefits visitors to the park, and that means anyone who wants to go there.
Simple. By funding Yellowstone with federal dollars, it maintains the park's status as one of the greatest tourist destinations in the world. Everyone who visits Yellowstone has to eat somewhere, sleep somewhere and fill their car with gas. Many of them also buy souvenirs. These things cost money, and all of these things are taxed. The taxes on these goods and services generate revenue for the state of Wyoming, which Wyoming uses to pay for services that benefit the residents of Wyoming.
Yup, the problem is that when people think of California, they think of L.A. or San Francisco. When people think of New York, they think of New York City. People don't realize that both of these deeply blue states are huge agricultural producers.
FYI, there are no "deeply blue states", only counties.
Everyone seems to have missed the point that Federal spending in Blue States is assumed to be going to individual welfare and Federal spending in Red States is going to honest hard working agricultural and petroleum monopolies and banks. Supporting individuals needing help is considered unworthy but subsidizing prosperous farms and industries is a good use of surplus tax money from the Blue States to the deserving Red States.
I consider the fact that little New Hampshire, as conservative, but apparently not neo-conservative, as you can get, cannot afford to maintain its own State park system but still sends $1.78 to the Federal Government for each $1.00 it receives in Federal spending. New Mexico, of similar population and vastly larger size, receives about $2.00 per $1.00. I wonder what the New Hampshire Congressional delegation is doing wrong. Get off your collective arses folks and get us some more pork.
Can you explain why the state budget doesn't cover the maintenance of the parks in New Hampshiire?
FYI, there are no "deeply blue states", only counties.
If several heavily populated counties are "Blue counties" then the state becomes a blue state. It's population and history not area the determine the political climate in a particular state.
"...The US Census came out with its annual report, the “Consolidated Federal Funds Report for Fiscal Year 2009: State and Country Areas” on how much the federal government spends on the 307,006,550 citizens who lived in America at the end of 2009. The state that received the most money per person was Alaska– $20,351. The state which received the least per person was Nevada– only $7.148...."
"...The US Census came out with its annual report, the “Consolidated Federal Funds Report for Fiscal Year 2009: State and Country Areas” on how much the federal government spends on the 307,006,550 citizens who lived in America at the end of 2009. The state that received the most money per person was Alaska– $20,351. The state which received the least per person was Nevada– only $7.148...."
If several heavily populated counties are "Blue counties" then the state becomes a blue state. It's population and history not area the determine the political climate in a particular state.
Well here's a little history:
My state of Massachusetts went red in both 1980 and 1984. It probably would have gone red again in 1988 if it were not for the fact that it was our former governor who was running on the Dem ticket.
We also put a red senator into The Congress in the most recent Senatorial election.
In addition: The entire nation, with the exception of DC and Mass went red in 1972.
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.
