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.
Wayyyy old news. This topic has been coming up for quite a while, I'm guessing you found the link through this site (edited for language): http://www.f***thesouth.com/
Excerpt:
"All those Federal taxes you love to hate? It all comes from us and goes to you, so shut up and enjoy your f***ing Tennessee Valley Authority electricity and your fancy highways that we paid for. And the next time Florida gets hit by a hurricane you can come crying to us if you want to, but you're the ones who built on a f***ing swamp. "Let the Spanish keep it, it’s a s***hole," we said, but you had to have your f***ing orange juice.
The next ****wad who says, "It’s your money, not the government's money" is gonna get their *** kicked. Nine of the ten states that get the most federal f***ing dollars and pay the least... can you guess? Go on, guess. That’s right, mother******, they're red states. And eight of the ten states that receive the least and pay the most? It’s too easy, ***hole, they’re blue states. It’s not your money, ***holes, it’s f***ing our money. What was that Real American Value you were spouting a minute ago? Self reliance? Try this for self reliance: buy your own f***ing stop signs, ***holes."
And so on. I believe this link has been posted before on the forum.
As to the OP, it does us no good to separate states into "red" and "blue." It's better to separate by county, some states have a good mix of political views but trend one way or another for various reasons. Keep in mind every state is not one person, but millions of different people. It would be more accurate to do individual surveys on Republicans and Democrats, and determine if each is more likely to be receiving government help.
No, I disagree. Because we're not talking about welfare money. We're talking about infrastructure investment and federal pork, which everyone in a state benefits from, or suffers from the lack thereof. I hate the phrases red state/blue state too, but it's clear to me that tea partiers in New York for example have something to be complaining about, whereas tea partiers in Alaska are benefitting from the federal government and need to shut their yaps.
Listen up Blue Staters: if you're tired of watching your tax money get siphoned off to Red States, stop voting for and supporting policies that enable the very siphoning you're whining about. Teach those Red Staters a lesson by giving them exactly what they want. Win-win, right? Until then, it's hard to be terribly sympathetic to the mewling about the results of the very policies you advocate.
Of course you'll need to be prepared to give up federal lands in states where the federal government owns a significant chunk of the real estate (in some cases a majority) such as Alaska and Wyoming and Nevada and so forth. And also be prepared for food prices to shoot out of sight since staple grain production (carried out largely in red states) will no longer be subsidized...
Listen up Blue Staters: if you're tired of watching your tax money get siphoned off to Red States, stop voting for and supporting policies that enable the very siphoning you're whining about. Teach those Red Staters a lesson by giving them exactly what they want. Win-win, right? Until then, it's hard to be terribly sympathetic to the mewling about the results of the very policies you advocate.
You must not understand Republican voter hypocrisy, then. As a quick example, Sharon Angle rages about government run healthcare, how socialist it is, until we find out that she is on her husbands government healthcare plan. Interviews with tea-partyers oftentimes reveals they are protesting high taxes that they themselves do not pay, and they are also frequently found collecting disability, social security, unemployment, welfare, government housing assistance, food stamps... While protesting government handouts, bailouts, wealth distribution, etc.
Voting for Republicans does not change the policies in place, because Republicans know that a large chunk of their voting base would be decidedly ruffled if the government wealth spigot were suddenly turned off. Republican politicians channel the hypocrisy of their poor subsidized voters, so voting for them does nothing but exacerbate the problem.
Vote Dem. At least they honestly and openly pander to the poor and middle class.
You must not understand Republican voter hypocrisy, then. As a quick example, Sharon Angle rages about government run healthcare, how socialist it is, until we find out that she is on her husbands government healthcare plan. Interviews with tea-partyers oftentimes reveals they are protesting high taxes that they themselves do not pay, and they are also frequently found collecting disability, social security, unemployment, welfare, government housing assistance, food stamps... While protesting government handouts, bailouts, wealth distribution, etc.
Voting for Republicans does not change the policies in place, because Republicans know that a large chunk of their voting base would be decidedly ruffled if the government wealth spigot were suddenly turned off. Republican politicians channel the hypocrisy of their poor subsidized voters, so voting for them does nothing but exacerbate the problem.
Vote Dem. At least they honestly and openly pander to the poor and middle class.
You paint such an inspiring picture of our electoral options. And it pretty much sums up why I haven't bothered to vote in years.
Well, you're from Hoboken, so you should be complaining because New Jersey receives the LEAST amount of money per capita from the federal government.
I complain about taxes all the time. I still don't understand the relevence of this post. I don't care where my tax dollars go, I do care that we have too much government (if government was smaller, my tax bill would be too), the distribution of that government is irrelevent to me.
I complain about taxes all the time. I still don't understand the relevence of this post. I don't care where my tax dollars go, I do care that we have too much government (if government was smaller, my tax bill would be too), the distribution of that government is irrelevent to me.
You should be complaining because your federal taxes fund the majority of people who complain about taxes but benefit from them. You have a point, they are hypocritical whiners.
For many decades, the Federal government robbed my state when they took over sections of the Gulf of Mexico from the state and began collecting oil leases from those sections. Our state sure could have used all that money. Oh, and by the way, though Louisiana may have voted majority Republican in previous presidential elections, you might want to check out how many decades (try over a century) the majority of the state's elected officials (including the federal congress) were in the Democratic party.
Well, you're from Hoboken, so you should be complaining because New Jersey receives the LEAST amount of money per capita from the federal government.
That means their congresspeople aren't packing their bills with enough pork at the Federal slaughterhouse.
Maybe that's a good thing.
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.
