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.
What's your excuse for the blood red swaths in Tennessee, Kentucky, Alabama, Mississippi, and West Virginia. Having been to all of those states, except WV, there aren't many "illegals and their kids suck up your taxpayer dollars."
It is called rural states with not a huge population. Thus the % seem high, but it doesn't take much to push them up. And, believe it or not, there may be more illegals in some of those states than you realize. Another thought, but some libs don't realize it: many on welfare are not voters. They are too lazy to get out of their recliners and get to the polls. People not on welfare often do vote and they vote Republican in the Family friendly, hard working states.
It is called rural states with not a huge population. Thus the % seem high, but it doesn't take much to push them up. And, believe it or not, there may be more illegals in some of those states than you realize. Another thought, but some libs don't realize it: many on welfare are not voters. They are too lazy to get out of their recliners and get to the polls. People not on welfare often do vote and they vote Republican in the Family friendly, hard working states.
Family Friendly, "hard working" Yeah, and on the topic of GDP, I bet outside of Texas, the GDP of Blue states crushes that of Red States. Furthermore, I would imagine that most blue states are "family Friendly" unless you're talking about all of that "Family Values" crap.
Originally Posted by nmnita It is called rural states with not a huge population. Thus the % seem high, but it doesn't take much to push them up. And, believe it or not, there may be more illegals in some of those states than you realize. Another thought, but some libs don't realize it: many on welfare are not voters. They are too lazy to get out of their recliners and get to the polls. People not on welfare often do vote and they vote Republican in the Family friendly, hard working states."
There is nothing family friendly wherever dire poverty rates exist, be that some inner city or some rural, backwoods, meth-laden swatch of any Southeast state.
The rates of education in such regions stink; the families simply prefer leeching off others, breaking the law, and bumming around..vs the American values of hard work and improving yourself.every generation. That creates economic genocide for the younger folks, and that is NOT family friendly.
Well, I can tell you that in UT, the areas with the most income from the feds are due to indian reservations. San Juan county is actually a pretty rich county; except for the UTE/Navajo reservations and you can see that flow right into AZ.
And don't forget the 13 western states receive a lot of Federal money for PILT funds (Payment in Lieu of Taxes). Those payments are due to the fact that the Feds own millions of acres that cannot be developed so the counties cannot obtain taxes.
Almost 60 percent of the land in UT alone is Federal; and yet, the county sheriffs continue to police the areas.
Welfare Demographics
Percent of recipients who are white 38.8 %
Percent of recipients who are black 39.8 %
Percent of recipients who are Hispanic 15.7 %
Percent of recipients who are Asian 2.4 %
Percent of recipients who are Other 3.3 %
It appears as though the largest recipient, as a percentage of welfare distributed, blacks are slightly higher than whites.
If you go by population of each race, blacks, as a percentage of their population, have a much greater participation in the welfare program than any other race.
I ACCEPT THIS. However the percentage of Whites would OBVIOUSLY BE LARGER because they are the larger group. Common sense should prevail here. Like I said 30% of 100,000 is larger than 30% of 10,000. Please give me a break.
As a percentage of population demographics, or sheer numbers?
Sheer numbers represent a percentage of the population. How else would this be factual.
If you are the majority in the country, wouldn't it stand to reason that YOUR percentage would be different for those who are in the minority in the country? You don't need to be a rocket science for this simple mathematics.
It's generational poverty culture here in America, nothing to do with pigmentation.
The reasons Asians, Indians etc. have done so well is because they are in most cases top tier people that beat out many many others to come here and work, study etc. I have two different friends that have done that and they are so far above the average chinese person it's not funny. No wonder their kid will grow to be a big success here given they are being raised in a high-acheiving academic household.
It is called rural states with not a huge population. Thus the % seem high, but it doesn't take much to push them up. And, believe it or not, there may be more illegals in some of those states than you realize. Another thought, but some libs don't realize it: many on welfare are not voters. They are too lazy to get out of their recliners and get to the polls. People not on welfare often do vote and they vote Republican in the Family friendly, hard working states.
Wow this whole post is just so ridiculous that I don't even know where to begin. People on welfare are too lazy to vote? What does that even mean? Voting isn't some noble act, it doesn't inherently make some a hardworking. Most people vote for a continuation of Wall St. and the banking cartel's domination of Washington, they vote for the continuation of the Fed, they vote for candidates who support never ending war and an ever bigger budget for the Department of "Defense." Voting Republican doesn't mean anything considering the difference between them and Democrats are essentially zilch.
By the way I'd love to meet all of those illegals running all over Appalachian Kentucky and West Virginia. I guess everyone has to have their scapegoats.
By the way I'd love to meet all of those illegals running all over Appalachian Kentucky and West Virginia. I guess everyone has to have their scapegoats.
Those could due to Black Lung benefits, not all, but enough. Then throw in unemployment benefits as domestic coal production is curtailed.
Does anyone have information on Maine? Just curious.
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.
Yeah, and on the topic of GDP, I bet outside of Texas, the GDP of Blue states crushes that of Red States. Furthermore, I would imagine that most blue states are "family Friendly" unless you're talking about all of that "Family Values" crap.
I guess everyone has to have their scapegoats.
