English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I remember hearing a while ago about how CA only recieves $.75 back from the federal govt for every $1.00 of tax revenue it sends to Washington, meaning CA recieves less than it gives. So I did a search to find that info and came across a study that shows all the states and what they give and get back from the feds. Almost all of the "donor" states, states that give more than they recieve, are blue states; there are some exceptions but very few. And almost all the red states recieve more than they give to the federal govt. Does anyone else think that this is extremely unfair? That states like mine, CA, have to help subsidize and support these red states like Wyoming, Alabama, ect.. People from red states always talk crap on CA and other "liberal" states but it's those "liberal" states and their tax dollars that support them. Why should a state recieve more money from the federal govt than they give?

2007-05-02 05:58:21 · 13 answers · asked by Sav 6 in Politics & Government Politics

You can check out the study here and look at the chart of page 2 to see what states are donor states and what states take in more than they give: http://www.calinst.org/pubs/BalCht03.pdf

2007-05-02 05:59:08 · update #1

suthrnly: not all liberals support welfare or wealth redistribution and you didn't even answer the question. Talk about hypocrisy, calling us tax and spend liberals then TAKING our tax money!

Tired O: Did you ever think of maybe factoring in population? Yes the country is mostly red when you look at the map but most of that red space is EMPTY SPACE WITH NO PEOPLE! The blue counties is where ALL THE PEOPLE live. Do children like have the mental capacity to realize that?

2007-05-02 06:11:26 · update #2

Bush_is.. I live in CA and I'm a transportation planner; what the hell do you do?

2007-05-02 06:15:26 · update #3

Just some background; I'm neither a democrat or republican. I'm a registered Independent and vote for both parties; so you can stop with the assumption of what you think my politics or views are b/c you don't know. I just find this extremely unfair that we pay more that we get back here in CA.

2007-05-02 06:17:21 · update #4

Madkins: you asked "Which states produce the grains, meat, oil, etc. for the blues to enjoy? " CALIFORNIA is the #1 agricultural state in this country. We grow our own food and produce our own meat that the rest of the country enjoys too.

2007-05-02 06:20:09 · update #5

13 answers

Do children who post things like this realize there are few blue states, only blue cities in mostly red states?

EDIT: You are totally right, the crime infested, illegal alien overrun, overpopulated, polluted cities from which middle-class working Americans are fleeing are where most dems/libs are located.

There's a reason most people are moving to "red states" and out of blue cities.....

Worst crime rates;
1 Maryland Baltimore
2 Michigan Detroit
3 Missouri St. Louis
4 District Of Columbia Washington
5 New Jersey Newark
6 Missouri Kansas City
7 Pennsylvania Philadelphia
8 Ohio Cincinnati
9 Ohio Cleveland
10 California Oakland
11 Georgia Atlanta
12 Wisconsin Milwaukee
13 Tennessee Memphis
14 New York Buffalo

MOST DANGEROUS 25:
Camden, NJ
Detroit, MI
St. Louis, MO
Birmingham, AL
Cleveland, OH
Oakland, CA
All of these cities are run by democrats.

The most polluted cities:
Los Angeles (CA)
Visalia-Porterville (CA)
Bakersfield (CA)
Fresno (CA)
Houston (TX)

BTW: a transportation in CA, too ironic. CA is a red state except for San Fran and LA, and the other areas are hardly just unoccupied space. You can keep your crappy cities, I went to college and grad school to get out, like most rational people.

Unfair? You live in a state the size of nearly the entire east coast with one of the largest economies in the world. BTW: your complaints make you sound conservative, so you might want to stop bashing red-staters.

2007-05-02 06:06:28 · answer #1 · answered by Tired o 3 · 2 4

This is pretty funny. Tell ya what, all of us Red Staters will simply stop producing goods and services for the Blue Staters.

Which states produce the grains, meat, oil, etc. for the blues to enjoy?

Besides- the state colors are actually pretty meaningless. The county breakdowns are more accurate. Looking by county, we see that most of the states are 'purple'- well-mixed red and blue. Behold- California is not as true blue as you seem to think if you look at it this way.

This is an interesting map in that respect: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:2004_US_elections_purple_counties.png

As far as the flow of tax money- that is also a pretty limited way to look at things. We can crunch the numbers a million different ways to show that these states are better/worse than those states, but in the end what does it really prove?

Our country does not need this polarization.

2007-05-02 06:16:23 · answer #2 · answered by Madkins007 7 · 1 4

I have long maintained that we should start reforming the federal tax and spending system in this respect immediately. This state welfare system has to end now.

Factoring out social security and medicare, no state should receive more in federal money than it contributes. The Red State conservatives who preach “self-reliance” should start living what they preach. The Blue States could actually use all that money that they’re giving to the poorer Red States for services and programs within their own states.

2007-05-02 09:52:56 · answer #3 · answered by tribeca_belle 7 · 2 0

They do not realize that. One of the reasons that it is that way is because of the high rate of people on welfare in red states and that all of the red states have a state minimum wage that is at or below the federal minimum wage. While all the blue states have a state minimum wage that is anywhere from 15-35% above the the federal minimum wage.

2007-05-02 06:12:48 · answer #4 · answered by cheri b 5 · 3 1

Almost all the blue donor states have higher average incomes, in part due to the need to offset the effects of a higher cost of living caused by higher state and local taxes.

Those higher average incomes push more residents of those states into higher federal tax brackets.

Don't blame us for the unintended consequences of the liberal nanny state.

2007-05-02 06:08:47 · answer #5 · answered by A Balrog of Morgoth 4 · 1 3

Eric C,

you do realize that 50% of the fruit and vegatables sold in the US are grown in a blue state...right? That state is of course California.

2007-05-02 06:11:13 · answer #6 · answered by beren 7 · 3 1

Red States won't care... it doesn't matter that they are wrong about taxation and that Blue States fund red states. They will continue to riducule all of those who live in liberal states...

its the hipocracy of the republican party

2007-05-02 06:04:51 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 6 4

And? I appreciate you telling me who the red states and the blue states are since I didn't really pay much attention to the last election coverage that used the color coded map. After our President was re-elected in a virtual landslide, I didn't need to watch anymore.

2007-05-02 06:03:56 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 4 5

That's because they're too dumb to understand or they like the Welfare they receive.


Ru, a landslide...haha, a 2.3% win by a wartime president with many voter irregularities...that's a slandslide, you're a red state moron

2007-05-02 06:04:14 · answer #9 · answered by gunkinthedrain 3 · 4 4

Yes it is

2016-05-18 22:55:46 · answer #10 · answered by ? 3 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers