s plagiarized from someone else for their own platform?
Posted on 11/18/2004 7:36:39 PM PST by Imnotalib
It's bad enough that the red states elected President Bush and sent the blues into a psychic tailspin. bush wins: upper west side put on suicide watch reads a T-shirt in Manhattan.
As students of the federal budget know, the citizens of some states pay more in taxes than they get back from Uncle Sam in grants and benefits. Arnold Schwarzenegger was stunned to learn upon taking office that for every dollar Californians send to Washington, they get back only 77 cents—an imbalance that topped $50 billion in 2003.
But a new analysis in The Great Divide: Retro vs. Metro America, a coffee-table book/political rant by liberal billionaire John Sperling, shows that a fiscal map looks awfully like an electoral map. Between 1991 and 2001, "winner" states got nearly $1 trillion more in federal benefits than they paid in taxes. Alabama won the biggest, raking in $100 billion. Losers California, New York, and Illinois each paid $250 billion or so more than they got back. The huge gaps are driven by higher average incomes in the "donor" states, plus subsidies for farms, oil, mining—"extractive" industries that skew red. There are exceptions (Texas is a loser, Pennsylvania a winner), but the map on this page shows the big picture.
The heist is more impressive considering that the winners have only a third of the U.S. population.
For blue staters, it's one thing to watch red states pick the President and set national policy on everything from Iraq to judges. But to pay them lavishly for the pleasure suggests that blues aren't just losers, they're stupid losers. You can feel blue anger rising. You reds don't like taxes? Okay, stop taking mine! You can have your states' rights too—and we'll start by cutting your allowance!
(Excerpt) Read more at fortune.com ...
In other words, the progressive income tax. How can the rich liberals in those states complain about the progressive income tax that takes away their incomes? Isn't paying high taxes a secular sacrament to them?
Oh! The heartbreak of PEST!
It's true in both red and blue states.
I was gonna say, pull up the red and blue counties in a lot of those blue states, and one will see it just ain't so.
Nearly half the populations of a lot of them voted for Bush as well, no?
This is GREAT! These blue state folks have just become fiscal Republicans! I say we foster these beliefs, nurture them, until we have a TAX CUT FOR THE RICH! Hah hah! Oh, this is too funny.
Fine. We'll make you blue staters pay for your food.
California gets BACK 77% of the money they send to Washington and their ENTIRE contribution to the thousands of other agencies and programs is $50 billion? What is he complaining about? Most states don't get anywhere NEAR 77% of their money back!
In Utah, the feds own over 2/3 of the land. The state can get no income from it; from property taxes for example. The same is true for a lot of red states. In a lot of the blue states, more of the land is in the name of private owners, and people pay taxes on income, don't they?
I suspect the reason might be because if you go back 6 years places like Massholachusetts which was receiving tremendous amounts of federal highway dollars for the Big Dig would be RED instead of BLUE. It might be interesting to see the maps for each year and for the last N years from N = 1 to N = 10 to see if the map was cherry picked from a number of maps that looked materially different.
Okay, What is the point?
People that make less money, should not be able to vote? I think that should be their next message.
Ahem
It is the Blue Big Cities not the Blue States
OK, let's take a look at my state--Nevada. About 90% of Nevada is owned by the federal government. The feds have their way with the state--they have huge military bases here, they have a huge nuclear test site with numerous facilities spread throughout, they're working on a nuclear dump in my backyard, and any land left over is tended to by the BLM bureaucrats. How much does all this cost? Billions, I'm sure, to maintain all these federal facilities.
If the blue states want these federal dollars back then the whiners need to contact their representatives in DC and ask them to start pulling strings to get a naval air base in their backyard. That nuclear dump is sure to pull in major bucks in jobs and "storage fees".
And you can bet that blowing up a nuke in your very own backyard is good for a few million $$ a shot.
So have at it, you whiny blue putzes. You think that your taxes are going towards keeping red welfare queens in donuts, but you're wrong--all that money goes to satisfying your NIMBYism.
s plagiarized from someone else for their own platform?
I suspect with the Republicans in charge, they have been able to get their states more money. Just like the Dems probably did when they were in charge.
No. California, Oregon, and Washington, all Blue states have most of their land owned by the Feds. Check out the National Forests or BLM and see.
Having said that, the argument of Blue vs. Red wealth and taxes is useless. Seattle (Blue) is Microsoft and Boeing. Boeing counts as an independent company. Same as Lockheed/Martin. Same as Grumman. Same as Raytheon. Get the picture.
Useless argument.
Well, Matt, the red-staters are doing everything they can to help your bunch. They want lower taxes and smaller government. Obviously, given your article, that's more of a boon to the blue-staters, right? Of course, until now, you blue-staters WANTED high taxes and big government.
CA gave the President the most votes...5.2 million...more than Texas did. Most of the counties in the "blue states" were red. So this whole scenario is just a liberal brain f*rt.
LOL
basically, that's what I've been saying ever since Geraldine Ferraro mad the vacuous remark about how the red states couldn't exist without the blue...
I said - without the blue, our dinner tables will still be full. What'll be on theirs?
(Course, I live in a ;o( blue state (but in a little red spot!) but my woods are full of game, I have a garden, got lots of well and pond and river water, got wood to burn in my stove. Let's see, what do I need from the Blues? Umm -umm- um
Or maybe those blue staters are just going to have stop electing big spending libs as their representatives.
WHERE'S THE BARF ALERT!
BTTT
In my world it is all about the bottom line.
I heard this on Rush this week and thought it was great. I guess the blue states will be united behind the Bush tax cuts now.
Actually, it was the lies, hate-mongering and fear-mongering of the rats that sent their sheeple into the 'psychic tailspin.'
Well that is a beautiful thing !
The Democrats are the champions of redistribution of wealth so they should be ecstatic....
Ahem
It is the Blue Big Cities not the Blue States
And who lives there? Ignorant wellfare supporters and their ilk.
You forget the latte sippers and the pederasts.
Good idea, let's get back to fair market value for food.
Lots of discussion here:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1282947/posts
This is dumb. States don't pay. Individuals pay.
Red people support blue people, always have, always will, period, 'nuff said...
Now if the blue states were smart enough to have a half dozen defense contractors, a few military bases, the main GSA warehouse, four ammunition plants and various other government funded organizations like a good ole state such as Missouri has, then they would receive more $$$ than they pay.
Most military bases/facilities are in red states
Most national parks are in red states.
Most NASA facilities are in red states
Most weapons testing facilities (Redstone Arsenal, China Lake, Yuma Proving Grounds, et al) are in red states
Most Native American reservations are in red states
Most(?) major manufacturers of military equipment and weapons systems (aircraft, vehicles, weapons) are in red states
Many Wash DC Federal employees live in red states, e.g. VA
Many Federal agencies have major facilities in red states, e.g. West VA (thank you Senator Byrd)
Most VA hospitals are in red states
Most defense contractors are in red states
Most retirees (military and civilian) live in red states
However:
Most crime centers are in blue states
Cities with the highest murder rate are in blue states
More drug addicts live in blue states
Most psychologists & psychiatrists are in blue states.
Most gangs are in red states
Most Middle Eastern immigrants live in blue states
Most public housing projects are in blue states
Most riots take place in blue states
Most "likely" potential terrorist targets are in blue states
The cultural symbols of the Great Satan are in New York, California and possibly Chicago, not Iowa, Alabama and South Dakota
I guess the Left can only think of welfare & income redistribution when they think of Federal taxes. They "paid" for those votes, and got ripped off by us ingrates.
I know how we'll fix the problem: we can locate a military base in Manhattan, and another in LA. We need realistic training space for urban combat. We can seize a fair section of Beverly Hills by eminent domain--we need a good simulation for fighting in the mansions of corrupt Muslim despots, and a section of the Upper East Side for simulations of generic urban combat. The folks in the 'Big Apple' can wake up to the sound of artillery practice the way we do here in its namesake, Manhattan, KS.
We can move an airbase from the heartland into the Boston suburbs and another near Redmond, WA.
While we're at it, we can thin out the air-traffic control facilities in 'fly-over county' just to handle the traffic that actually stops here, start charging the Blue cities the natural price for food with the premium for market risk now absorbed by Federal agricultural subsidies passed on to the consumer, auction off the National Parks, National Forests, and ANWAR and distribute the sales proceeds to urbanite and start private development to increase the tax base out here in the sticks, and give a few Indian tribes back their ancestral lands in New England and the upper Midwest so the BIA can spend its budget there.
Now I'm going to find a thread on DU on the topic and post this there. (A few fewer demonRATS due to apoplexy?)
I know how we'll fix the problem: we can locate a military base in Manhattan, and another in LA. We need realistic training space for urban combat. We can seize a fair section of Beverly Hills by eminent domain--we need a good simulation for fighting in the mansions of corrupt Muslim despots, and a section of the Upper East Side for simulations of generic urban combat. The folks in the 'Big Apple' can wake up to the sound of artillery practice the way we do here in its namesake, Manhattan, KS.
We can move an airbase from the heartland into the Boston suburbs and another near Redmond, WA.
While we're at it, we can thin out the air-traffic control facilities in 'fly-over county' just to handle the traffic that actually stops here, start charging the Blue cities the natural price for food with the premium for market risk now absorbed by Federal agricultural subsidies passed on to the consumer, auction off the National Parks, National Forests, and ANWAR and distribute the sales proceeds to urbanite and start private development to increase the tax base out here in the sticks, and give a few Indian tribes back their ancestral lands in New England and the upper Midwest so the BIA can spend its budget there.
Now I'm going to find a thread on DU on the topic and post this there. (A few fewer demonRATS due to apoplexy?)
Lemme see if I got this straight: because the 'blue' states pay more than 'red' states, they're somehow BETTER? Don't they claim that the REPUBLICANS are the party of the rich?
Second, going to the pointlessness: won't this statistic always show a bias against poorer states?
Third, going to the pointlessness: aren't these folks the big fans of redistribution anyway?
I could go on, but it'd continue to pointlessness.
If you combine data on voter preference by income level (from exit poll data) and percent of taxes paid by income level (income, payroll, and excise taxes from IRS data), you find that Bush voters pay 57% of the taxes and Kerry voters pay 42% of the taxes.
% of taxes paid
Under $15,000 - 1.2%
$15,000-$29,999 - 4.3%
$30,000-$49,999 - 11.0%
$50,000-$74,999 - 14.6%
$75,000-$99,999 - 13.9%
$100,000-$199,999 - 23.3%
$200,000 or more - 31.7%
% voting for Bush
Under $15,000 - 36%
$15,000-$29,999 - 42%
$30,000-$49,999 - 49%
$50,000-$74,999 - 56%
$75,000-$99,999 - 55%
$100,000-$199,999 - 57%
$200,000 or more - 63%
For each income level, multiplying (% of taxes paid) X (% voting for Bush), gives you
% of taxes paid by Bush voters
Under $15,000 - 0.4%
$15,000-$29,999 - 1.8%
$30,000-$49,999 - 5.4%
$50,000-$74,999 - 8.2%
$75,000-$99,999 - 7.6%
$100,000-$199,999 - 13.3%
$200,000 or more - 20.0%
For a total of 57% of taxes paid by Bush voters. You can do the same exercise for Kerry and see that he gets 42%.
Exit poll source: http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/US/P/00/epolls.0.html
Tax data source: http://www.house.gov/jct/x-2-01.pdf
"Actually, it was the lies, hate-mongering and fear-mongering of the rats that sent their sheeple into the 'psychic tailspin.'"
~Ed in NJ~ Right on target, Ed!
And these lying, hate-mongering, and fear-mongering Democrat leaders are still at it. They haven't learned anything from the backhanding that the American people gave them on November 2. And they cannot understand that lying, hate-mongering, and fear-mongering are a large part of what the American people mean by "moral values".
And the morons who believed all that Democrat propaganda and voted for John Kerry (of all people) are now headed to the shrink because they can't reconcile the lies, hate, and fear that their sociopathic leaders fed them with reality.
Your's is the best observation yet on the election. The Democrats' depravity defeated them and sent them to the psychotherapists.
Thanks!
How long would LA survive if the tap on the Colorado was turned off?
exactly - and who knows...the ring of fire has been getting pretty active lately.
Maybe one good shake will turn of the tap ;o)
Dude, look at the map. Nevada is a tax giver and not a tax consumer state. You guys are basically allowing the Feds to do all this crap and not even get any extra. I think someone needs to have a talk with Harry Reid.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.