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.
I find it interesting that all of the 'receiver' states have the largest military presence as opposed to the 'donor' states. However, without a breakdown of expenditure it is hard to pinpoint where the money is going.
New Mexico and Mississippi are among the poorest states in the nation, but the list is misleading since New Mexico is actually a blue state, as is Virginia.. Even in the remaining red states, the states are only red by a couple hundred thousand votes in most cases...
By the way, does anyone else here remember when red/blue state did not indicate the party?? If I recall, Reagan's victory in 1984 was referred to as a 'sea of blue' yet he was obviously a Republican..
Quote:
Originally Posted by harborlady
I know what it means in WV. Those who didn't get the grades for college, or can't find financial aid, or have no clue what career they should pursue, wind up joining the military. Lack of diverse opportunity in rural settings becomes one of the few open doors available to them.
FYI, the military is much better job training than college. The purpose of college is a higher education, not job training. You do not learn job skills in college, which makes it rather useless to most rural individuals... However, in the military you are trained for a job, and some of the AIT courses are quite lengthy. Besides, having a college degree rarely guarantees you employment because you still lack experience.
These poor Southern states should ask the governor of Texas for handouts & not the federal government [especially since they refuse to even thank the rest of America for being on the dole.
katiana, that's not what I said, but it was the vested interest RayinAK had to miscommunicate deliberately. 18yr old WV'ns who do not go onto higher education are hard pressed to find a career at all, in any industry, because economic diversity is largely absent for many decades. The further away from our cities the worse it gets. Youth have for many decades been encouraged to leave the state to seek their fortune (which I find sad). WV governor has been making serious efforts to change this, but that takes time & effort, and not many will hold their breath. Bittersweet economics here but not being native, I'm more impervious.
RayinAK-- you refuse to acknowlege the fact that 90% of the revenue stays in state kitty reducing your overall tax burden locally because you've got that revenue stream subsidy happening to enable that, whereas other states not only pay more into federal than they ever get back, but they also shoulder the full cost of their own neighborhoods with what's left in their hand AFTER taking care of Alaska and WV and Louisianna. 10% goes to federal and is included in the math formula of black ink vs red ink. You're still getting more than you give, which is full time subsidy to alaska. You begrudge the ammount of land owned by federal... 103 million acres and you aren't self sufficient with that yet???
I'm neither dem nor repub as well. I'm a native NY'r and I live by choice in WV. I have no hatred of any state, but you've confused your ideology for reality. The reality is blue states have been shouldering more than their fair share-- which isn't a big deal until they get a kick in the teeth & blamed for doing so. Then things get ugly. I suppose we could just get the 100% flat tax system to make sure everyone is Rhode Island-- put in a dollar, get out a dollar. I'm certain many states will get a rude awakening. Even DC having to pay for it's own elaborate security & largesse... OH my the look on DC resident faces having to shoulder the entire federal govt & accessories alone!
Against pensions? GM was obliged to set that money aside in interest bearing vehicles same as airlines as part of compensation plan. The difference between Board room & workforce is that the Boardroom gets their retirement money up front, and workforce gets theirs on the back end. They found ways around it despite legislation? Those pensions mean they're less dependent on welfare.
I'd be interested to see your math about how someone should plan any retirement when the insurance fund covering pensions was sold down the river by Bush jr on wall street gambles last fall. How many responsible people with 401k plans down the crapper? How many privately held annuities (assuming they're solvent when all these banks are plagued with toxic assets) will be down the crapper if inflation gets ugly? How does your ideology solve retirement planning for the masses? How would you balance the budgets? How would you prevent/ mitigate corruption in 2 party system? I'm listening.
Simple answer with a few words: as I explained already, we pay local taxes to take care of our neighborhoods, towns, cities, etc. The figures you are using are "per capita." Take the example of NY with millions of people, a huge number of homeless, poor, Indian reservations, Welfare recipients, illegal immigrants, and so forth. Add the total Federal $ given to NY for the support of these people. Now add the total Federal $ given to Alaska for the support of Alaska Indians, Welfare recipients, the homeless, etc., and compare the two numbers. Since NY has millions of inhabitants, it has a lot more poor, welfare recipients, etc. than Alaska ever will. Therefore, the total sum of money NY receives is much larger than that of Alaska.
Again: using "per capita" numbers can be misleading. You have to figure where the money is going to. Is it going to support the Government programs and workforce, or is it going to Alaska residents?
The cost of living in those "blue states" is through the roof, people need to make a six figure salary to be able to afford a tiny two bedroom house. Of coarse you're going to pay more taxes if you need to make a high income to survive. Get the COL under control in those states and you won't bear so much of the burden.
And on top of all that, they tax themselves to death to pay for the huge city and State budgets they create. This results in businesses moving to other States. NY, CA, and a lot of other States (including Alaska), have huge government workforces. Alaska workers are supported with money from the State coffers, but local property and sale taxes supplement school, boroughs, cities, etc. The Federal Government supports itself from money taken by all US workers, and in the case of Alaska, this workforce is enormous.
The cost of living in those "blue states" is through the roof, people need to make a six figure salary to be able to afford a tiny two bedroom house. Of coarse you're going to pay more taxes if you need to make a high income to survive. Get the COL under control in those states and you won't bear so much of the burden.
I agree that we make more and have a higher population and therefore pay more in taxes, but we also have more needs.. The issue is why are we shouldering the burden (dollar in dollar out) to subsidize the red states? The stats in the op show what we recieve vs. what we pay in, and the red states are not paying their fair share.
And on top of all that, they tax themselves to death to pay for the huge city and State budgets they create. This results in businesses moving to other States. NY, CA, and a lot of other States (including Alaska), have huge government workforces. Alaska workers are supported with money from the State coffers, but local property and sale taxes supplement school, boroughs, cities, etc. The Federal Government supports itself from money taken by all US workers, and in the case of Alaska, this workforce is enormous.
We are paying your lack of federal taxes and you can't spin that. We are talking about federal taxes not state or local so why don't you stay on point.
We are paying your lack of federal taxes and you can't spin that. We are talking about federal taxes not state or local so why don't you stay on point.
You are confused. I was responding to another poster. I pay Federal taxes just like you do, and I don't receive your portion of the Federal income taxes, since I am still working and don't live in Welfare.
You are confused. I was responding to another poster. I pay Federal taxes just like you do, and I don't receive your portion of the Federal income taxes, since I am still working and don't live in Welfare.
I'm not confused at all, the op states that the Blue states are paying more than they are recieving and the red states are recieving more than they are paying...sounds like the redistribution of wealth to me.
I find it interesting that all of the 'receiver' states have the largest military presence as opposed to the 'donor' states. However, without a breakdown of expenditure it is hard to pinpoint where the money is going.
New Mexico and Mississippi are among the poorest states in the nation, but the list is misleading since New Mexico is actually a blue state, as is Virginia.. Even in the remaining red states, the states are only red by a couple hundred thousand votes in most cases...
By the way, does anyone else here remember when red/blue state did not indicate the party?? If I recall, Reagan's victory in 1984 was referred to as a 'sea of blue' yet he was obviously a Republican..
I can't remember how I voted that year... not sure libertarian candidate was on the ballot. I either voted 3rd party or voted for every other thing (family court judges blah blah) and abstained from presidential voting. Neither candidate represented me and I held my nose showing up. I never miss a vote although there have been enough occassions where damned if you do damned if you don't. I'm fiscal conservative and reagan= not fiscal conservative.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankie117
FYI, the military is much better job training than college. The purpose of college is a higher education, not job training. You do not learn job skills in college, which makes it rather useless to most rural individuals... However, in the military you are trained for a job, and some of the AIT courses are quite lengthy. Besides, having a college degree rarely guarantees you employment because you still lack experience.
I can agree in part. I went to college and also went military. Both forms of education were invaluable to me. There are many forms of education even beyond those examples, and most of them never get recognized in tangible benchmarks. I consider that to be a downside of capitalism, but I wouldn't rid america of capitalism over it. Opportunity for me was as easy as spitting distance manhattan. That is not the same as a kid raised on a mtn top where trickle down effect never goes up that hill. Many small towns like that across USA. Maybe that population would add up to be equal to large scale city?? Never saw that math done.
You are confused. I was responding to another poster. I pay Federal taxes just like you do, and I don't receive your portion of the Federal income taxes, since I am still working and don't live in Welfare.
OK ray I'll put it to you this way using my own state as an example. The coal is owned by the state, and as such, does use it to pay for it's own government virtually tax free. States with natural resources have a loophole so they don't have to bother taxing it's residents directly for the services they recieve. It is subsidizing most everything here. NJ does not get that benefit, to their detriment. Characterizing dem states citizens as welfare recipients is way out of line. They work damned hard and do shoulder more because their economy enables them to do so.
How to trim down govt so that everyone shoulders less... that's what everyone would love to hear as suggestion and what your language should address directly. Alaskan govt wouldn't be able to be lean if they had to manage a population density of most major cities. Y'all don't even register as a blip. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of..._by_population Neither does WV, and I happen to like it that way, but in all honesty if every resident had to cover massive infrastructure for something as fundamental as a water treatment plant, it would take 2 lifetimes to pay it. Similar results for electric grid upgrades.
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.
