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 problem is the democrats and their love for welfare and other social programs...the more they push these programs the more the welthier states will pay for the poorer states. the more they push the "tax the rich" mantra, the more the rich will be paying for the poor.......NJ has more people that are considered wealthy, than it has people below the poverty line...a state like SC has more workingclass and poor than it has wealthy.....its simple math....and there is a simple solution,,, vote out the tax and spend liberals
sounds like a good plan. however,republicans are going to find a loophole or just plain flat out reject it because their states will hurt more. If that happened,they wont get re -elected. Also, i see that people tend to vote more on social issues rather than thinking about their pocketbooks.
I think it may have to do with who we elect to represent us in congress. It appears that the majority of liberal states typically receive less back from the government and the majority of conservative states tend to get more back.
Here's a graphic (slightly dated, but can't find anything more current) depicting this:
Quote:
The report shows that of the 32 states (and the District of Columbia) that are "winners" -- receiving more in federal spending than they pay in federal taxes -- 76% are Red States that voted for George Bush in 2000. Indeed, 17 of the 20 (85%) states receiving the most federal spending per dollar of federal taxes paid are Red States. Here are the Top 10 states that feed at the federal trough (with Red States highlighted in bold): States Receiving Most in Federal Spending Per Dollar of Federal Taxes Paid:
1. D.C. ($6.17)
2. North Dakota ($2.03)
3. New Mexico ($1.89)
4. Mississippi ($1.84)
5. Alaska ($1.82)
6. West Virginia ($1.74)
7. Montana ($1.64)
8. Alabama ($1.61)
9. South Dakota ($1.59)
10. Arkansas ($1.53)
In contrast, of the 16 states that are "losers" -- receiving less in federal spending than they pay in federal taxes -- 69% are Blue States that voted for Al Gore in 2000. Indeed, 11 of the 14 (79%) of the states receiving the least federal spending per dollar of federal taxes paid are Blue States. Here are the Top 10 states that supply feed for the federal trough (with Blue States highlighted in bold): States Receiving Least in Federal Spending Per Dollar of Federal Taxes Paid:
1. New Jersey ($0.62)
2. Connecticut ($0.64)
3. New Hampshire ($0.68)
4. Nevada ($0.73)
5. Illinois ($0.77)
6. Minnesota ($0.77)
7. Colorado ($0.79)
8. Massachusetts ($0.79)
9. California ($0.81)
10. New York ($0.81)
Oh we have wealth people here because of the big businesses. That draws people here.
I agree that our officials have done much of nothing for us here. Which baffles because they keep getting re-elected.
No, we have wealthy people because we just make more. even as a secretary, she might make 60,000 in nj but 35,000 in nc. or a nurse, 75,000 in nj but 45,000 in nc.(my story)
i know people who have had houses built from the ground up while making only 50,000 a year. cant try that in Nj,better keep dreaming.
This has come up periodically here. One thing no one seems to be taking in to account is that many states that are "taking" more money than their residents pay in also have a heavy military or other federal installation presence. Take MD as an example, and contrary to what some seem to think it's not only the "red" states that get back more than paid in, which is as reliable a "blue" state that there is. It gets $1.30 or so for every dollar paid. Or DC (which makes sense due to the large federal persence).
what im trying to say is that why do we get taxed more just because we make more money and no one factors in cost of living?? all of us know having 100,000 in nj is not the same as having 100000 in south carolina. for instance, on 100,000 i would still be living in the ghetto in nj but on the same salary 100,000 id be "rich" in south carolina. how come they have to pay the same income tax if one has way more buying power? For example: 100,000 in nj is equivalent to say 50,000 in sc but we know who gets taxed more.
and then: if nj is such a rich state how come we are in a deeper hole than sc when we send more to washington? how about getting more back to balance our own state budget? the thing im scratching my head about is how come all those politicians from red states are always talking about "let people keep what they earn",cut social programs,tax cuts for the rich,etc when those things would hurt those states the most.
but that is what the 'national' liberals are pushing...look at what they are saying "tax the rick, people making more than 200k"....200k here on Long Island is MIDDLECLASS
I heard one liberal saying we should tax the rich at 90%....so I asked him what rich was..he said anyone making over 250k.....so the liberals want to tax a guy making 250k at 90%...why would anyone even want to become 'rich' with the way liberals want to tax, to support thier 'social' programs
Quote:
the thing im scratching my head about is how come all those politicians from red states are always talking about "let people keep what they earn",cut social programs,tax cuts for the rich,etc when those things would hurt those states the most
because they are NOT saying cut the taxes for the rich, they are saying cut the taxes for EVERYONE, and everyone will have more in their pocket. and yes cut the social programs, there are people that are 3 generations of welfare just riding the system
if we get rid of the entitlement programs (the way they are) and re-do them to their original intent ( a helping hand UP) then you would see a 'fairness'
btw, the 'difference' between the norther states and the southern satets is starting to disappear too, and states like New York are going through a so called "brain drain" as people are leaving high tax states like New York for lower cost of living states like NC/SC
No, we have wealthy people because we just make more. even as a secretary, she might make 60,000 in nj but 35,000 in nc. or a nurse, 75,000 in nj but 45,000 in nc.(my story)
i know people who have had houses built from the ground up while making only 50,000 a year. cant try that in Nj,better keep dreaming.
you cant even buy a house on long island if you only earn 75K/year
but in some of those other states 75k/year you could get a mortgage for a mansion
I think it may have to do with who we elect to represent us in congress. It appears that the majority of liberal states typically receive less back from the government and the majority of conservative states tend to get more back.
Here's a graphic (slightly dated, but can't find anything more current) depicting this:
Actually, it has to do with how those federal dollars are spent. There appears to be the mistaken impression that the States or the people in those States are the primary beneficiaries of those federal dollars. The reality is that the vast majority of those federal dollars are being spent on federal programs.
Alaska, for example, has 16 federal military, FAA, and NOAA bases and stations all over the state. In addition to more than 120 million acres of federal lands being managed by the BLM and National Park Service.
Now if you want to eliminate all federal lands, the BLM, National Parks, the military and other federal agencies, I am quite certain you can dramatically reduce the amount of federal dollars being spent in Alaska. But to blame the residents of a given State for the federal dollars being spent in the State is simply moronic.
what im trying to say is that why do we get taxed more just because we make more money and no one factors in cost of living?? all of us know having 100,000 in nj is not the same as having 100000 in south carolina. for instance, on 100,000 i would still be living in the ghetto in nj but on the same salary 100,000 id be "rich" in south carolina. how come they have to pay the same income tax if one has way more buying power? For example: 100,000 in nj is equivalent to say 50,000 in sc but we know who gets taxed more.
and then: if nj is such a rich state how come we are in a deeper hole than sc when we send more to washington? how about getting more back to balance our own state budget? the thing im scratching my head about is how come all those politicians from red states are always talking about "let people keep what they earn",cut social programs,tax cuts for the rich,etc when those things would hurt those states the most.
Well my dear welcome to the world of "spreading the wealth". If you voted for Obama you are getting exactly what he promised. Take from the "rich" and give to the poor.
As for why our state is bankrupt look to our corrupt politicians.
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.
