First call to impeach Obama, depending on what he does...

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by dalakhani

You forgot entitlements Chuck...Didnt you?

Since red states have less people than blue states wouldnt the amount of entitlement money of federal tax dollars as a % be higher in Blue states? Meaning that the large in size but less populated states like Utah, Nevada, Montana, etc are getting a far greater % of their federal tax dollars for non-entitlement programs? CA alone gets more entitlement money than any 10 red states combined.

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Since red states have less people than blue states wouldnt the amount of entitlement money of federal tax dollars as a % be higher in Blue states? Meaning that the large in size but less populated states like Utah, Nevada, Montana, etc are getting a far greater % of their federal tax dollars for non-entitlement programs? CA alone gets more entitlement money than any 10 red states combined.

Chuck spinning! I like it.

California PAYS a lot more in taxes. The amount it receives per dollar contributed is still much lower . That was the original point that Genuine Risk made that you were disputing. You then tried to say that federal spending merely entailed roads, prisons, etc not mentioning entitlements. I am just making sure you stay accurate thats all.

A quote from the tax foundation economist:

To quote the author of our most recent dollar-for-dollar comparison, former Tax Foundation economist Curtis Dubay:

"The Tax Foundation’s annual federal tax burden and expenditure study clarifies the geographical patterns of income redistribution that federal tax and spending policies cause each year. The results of the study have been controversial for years because they show that the nation is not only redistributing income from the prosperous to the poor, but from the middle-income residents of high-cost states to the middle-income residents of low-cost states.
"Thanks to a steeply progressive federal income tax, states with higher incomes pay vastly higher federal taxes, payments that are unlikely ever to be matched by federal spending directed to those states. Ironically, most of these high-paying states are the so-called [I]blue states [/i]that have generally elected politicians who support a more steeply progressive tax system even though their own constituents bear a greater share of the burden as the code gets more progressive."

A link in case you wanted to read. Good Stuff:

http://www.taxfoundation.org/blog/show/24471.html

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by dalakhani

Chuck spinning! I like it.

California PAYS a lot more in taxes. The amount it receives per dollar contributed is still much lower . That was the original point that Genuine Risk made that you were disputing. You then tried to say that federal spending merely entailed roads, prisons, etc not mentioning entitlements. I am just making sure you stay accurate thats all.

A quote from the tax foundation economist:

To quote the author of our most recent dollar-for-dollar comparison, former Tax Foundation economist Curtis Dubay:

"The Tax Foundation’s annual federal tax burden and expenditure study clarifies the geographical patterns of income redistribution that federal tax and spending policies cause each year. The results of the study have been controversial for years because they show that the nation is not only redistributing income from the prosperous to the poor, but from the middle-income residents of high-cost states to the middle-income residents of low-cost states.
"Thanks to a steeply progressive federal income tax, states with higher incomes pay vastly higher federal taxes, payments that are unlikely ever to be matched by federal spending directed to those states. Ironically, most of these high-paying states are the so-called [I]blue states [/i]that have generally elected politicians who support a more steeply progressive tax system even though their own constituents bear a greater share of the burden as the code gets more progressive."

A link in case you wanted to read. Good Stuff:

http://www.taxfoundation.org/blog/show/24471.html

It doesnt break the tax dollars spent down therefore makes unjust claims. For example a large Western red state like Wyoming has a greater need for most of the federal tax dollars than a small eastern state like MA simply because of it size. Per capita spending is flawed because obviously the states with higher incomes and more people will pay more in but their needs because of the physical characteristics of the state are different. The entitlement money is used in a far greater manner by smaller more populpous states. A state like New mexico ranks high in per capita spending because there is a great deal of federal business going on therelike the Los Alomos lab and huge amounts of federal parkland that need to be kept up. The idea that the poor of New Mexico are somehow getting more money than they deserve is ludicrious but that is the inference being made. States like FL with a high number of retirees naturally will have a disportionate amount of SS entitlement money.

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

It doesnt break the tax dollars spent down therefore makes unjust claims. For example a large Western red state like Wyoming has a greater need for most of the federal tax dollars than a small eastern state like MA simply because of it size. Per capita spending is flawed because obviously the states with higher incomes and more people will pay more in but their needs because of the physical characteristics of the state are different. The entitlement money is used in a far greater manner by smaller more populpous states. A state like New mexico ranks high in per capita spending because there is a great deal of federal business going on therelike the Los Alomos lab and huge amounts of federal parkland that need to be kept up. The idea that the poor of New Mexico are somehow getting more money than they deserve is ludicrious but that is the inference being made. States like FL with a high number of retirees naturally will have a disportionate amount of SS entitlement money.

Regardless of what the money is being spent on, the facts are the facts. Lets break it down into a neighborhood HOA. Family A lives in a smaller house and has 8 kids. Family B lives in a bigger house with 2 acres and has 2 kids. HOA dues are determined by income. Family A parents make a lot more money than Family B parents and thus are contributing much more to the HOA. The bill for the internet, cable, sidewalk service, trash pick up, ETC that Family B enjoys is being picked up in a larger portion by Family A regardless of the fact that the kids of family A have more time at the playground paid by HOA funds.

I do agree with you about states like New Mexico, Virginia, Maryland, ETC that are naturally going to have more federal spending simply because of the concentration of federal government in those states.

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Originally Posted by dalakhani

Chuck spinning!

All the Conservatives are pretty overcooked right now..