Left-Wing Buchananites(Is it true that you red-staters are living off the public dole?)

Best of the Web Today ^ | November 9, 2004 | James Taranto

[hemi dawg]

Left-Wing Buchananites ... Lawrence O'Donnell and Eleanor Clift, reacting to President Bush's stunning re-election victory by out-Buchananing Buchanan:

O'Donnell: The big problem the country now has, which is going to produce a serious discussion of secession over the next 20 years, is that the segment of the country that pays for the federal government is now being governed by the people who don't pay for the federal government. . . .

Ninety percent of the red states are welfare client states of the federal government. They collect more from the federal government than they send in. New York and California, Connecticut, the states that are blue are all the states that are paying for the bulk of everything this government does, from the ward of Social Security to everything else, and the people in those states don't like what this government is doing. . . . ... Obviously, this is crazy talk. But it's interesting crazy talk, because it reveals something about how the liberal elite views America. O'Donnell talks about secession driven by economics: Blue states pay a disproportionately high share of federal taxes, while red states receive a disproportionately high share of subsidies. Well, fine, but isn't it the blue-state types who favor higher taxes, especially on "the wealthy"? If guys like O'Donnell feel overtaxed, why not make common cause with the Republicans and starve the beast? ... They are willing to pay higher taxes to subsidize the rest of the country, provided the rest of the country allows them to dictate their social policies.

A week ago the red states rejected this view. The blue states are not going to secede, but maybe, just maybe, they will respond with a tax revolt. Now there's a liberal cause we could get behind.

[trashcanbred]

What is so amazing is just how childish they have become. How they are bad mouthing the red states is absolutely incredible.

Maybe they should take a look at the election at the county level and see that many blue states have red counties. I live in a Blue State but we were 60% Bush and the surrounding counties were too. If they want to secede that is fine as long as they do it on a county level instead of at the state level.

[grb]

Let see, all those people that live in the cities vote Democratic and where I live those are the poorest in the state. It's where most of the tax dollars go. Looks like another dumb ass theory put forth by dumb asses.

[Arizona Carolyn]

Me, too... seems to me the biggest cities were blue and the most welfare is in the big cities???? Someone please tell me if I'm wrong in that? The other Big "Blue" would be the unions... again mostly in the big cities and paying a fortune to the democratic party.

[gorush]

We bought 50 acres and built a home...it came with a Farm Number. It took two years of (eventually) disrespectful correspondence to get our farm # deleted from the dole. I could tell that mine was a rare complaint.

[stands2reason]

Don't worry about it. West Virginia didn't.

[ladyinred]

Is it true that you red-staters are living off the public dole?

God this is maddening! I want to jump through the screen and slap these people! I must be a Bluestater at heart! :-)

[frannie]

Breaking it down by counties is the only fair way to assess the cost. Maybe a better way is to do it as they do the counties. Do it state by state but show how much that states pays in Federal Taxes and then show where in the state most of the funds are distributed.

It can't be any harder than preparing the map, county by county, on the total votes cast in each county and for whom. If I were a betting woman I would bet it's in the towns or cities where there is low income housing etc. Frannie

[Political Junkie Too]

But looks like the Reds are feeding the Blues.

There are lots more charts. Source: 1997 AGRICULTURAL ATLAS OF THE UNITED STATES

-PJ

[kalee]

+ West Virginia $ 1.75


I can explain WV. Thank you Robert C.Byrd, who never met a barrel of pork he didn't try to send home to WV, but
what's up with ND and NM? Is it the Indian Reservations?

[RustysGirl]

I think the "data" is from a group called the Tax Foundation. This is the link. Note: I'm not vouching for the group or its data. But this is probably what the discussions here are based on.

http://www.taxfoundation.org/ff/taxingspendingupdate.html

[k2blader]

Nice, thanks.

[alwaysconservative]

North Dakota is a case to illustrate your point: High federal dollars for ag subsidies, military bases (2), and 4 Indian reservations that receive ONLY federal money, no other sources. (And the reservations are so blue they're indigo!) Farmers and Native Americans are government beneficiaries and vote disproportionately blue; the ONLY counties in ND to go blue were the reservations.

[anonsquared]

You all may want to check this PORK PER CAPITA BY STATE link also. It seems to me there are some blue areas at the top of this list. And I'm sure if you found a county-by-county welfare roll map, the majority of those collecting live in America's major cities - all blue.

http://www.cagw.org/site/DocServer/Pork_per_capita__2004__Summary_.pdf?docID=521

[RustysGirl]

I'm trying to find the group that does these stats, but you should see how much US federal money each citizen of different foreign countries gets in comparison to the citizens of each US state. That will really give you a headache!

[alwaysconservative]

Great post!

[Jackson Brown]

The reason the Blue states (really counties) pay more in Income tax is because they MAKE far more money. The cost of living in all these places, due to high socialistic and regulatory costs, make it mandatory that people get higher salaries if they are to be attracted to living/working in these areas.

When a 500 Sq. ft -- 1 room apartment -- in New York cost 2-3 times what a 3000 square foot house in Kansas, that tells you a lot about why -- in strict dollar terms -- that they woud have to be higher paid.

It's simply a matter of lower pay/lower taxes -- higher pay/higher taxes. Bogus claim.

[alwaysconservative]

Please see my post #72. North Dakota's federal dollars land disproportionately on the reservations.

[kalee]

My doctors did. Of course they're Duke University affiliates. They voted Kerry because they supported his anti-war stance.

[jackbill]

I believe that the argument was whether or not the Blue states sent more money to the federal government than they got back. And that the Red states got more money back from the federal government than they sent in.

The graph that I linked indicated that they probably did.

You can argue with the data, or you can argue with the details of the data. But you've got to show data that contravenes the data on the chart or you are just offering an opinion.

[xkaydet65]

There's more Math that no one talks about. It actually is true that states like NY and mass send more tax dollars to the Feds than benefits returned, numbers are real. But what is never mentioned is the deductibility of state and local taxes from the Fed Income tax. Anyone who can itemize his taxes saves 30% of the actual amount of his state and local tax. This amounts to a gift to high tax states from Washington. Why is it a gift? If there was no deductibility the acquiescence to high taxes would turn NY and Mass into Lexington and Concord. Whenever our taxes are increased we are told well you can deduct them from the Federal tax.. These deductions allow high tax and service governments and cost the Feds about 20-25% in tax revenues from these states. So the feds ar subsidizing the large entitlements provided by NY, Mass, Pa., and Calif.