Seems the Blue States are still funding the Red States

LV426 said:
The problem is that isn't what red states do, though.

Because of the welfare reform of the 1990's, federal welfare is no longer direct-to-recipient. Instead, it is now mostly given to states in the form of block grants because the argument was "states know better how to spend money than the feds" - a bullshit argument, of course. So the welfare reform law mandated that states need only spend 66% of the block grant on federal programs and can do what they want with the rest. So what do most red states do? Take the remainder of the welfare block grant to subsidize artificially low tax rates for (mostly) the wealthy. Because you see, tax cuts and low tax rates always lead to deficits, and since most of those red states have stupid BBA's, they have to raid the welfare block grant just to make up the revenue gaps that come from low tax rates. My state of GA is notorious for this, but we've seen it happen over and over the last 20 years. Most recently in Kansas, where they cut welfare to balance the budget that was thrown into disarray by the Conservative and Art Laffer-backed Brwnback Tax Cuts that failed to deliver on any of the promises made of them. Those tax cuts were so terrible that Republicans repealed them.

It's another example of Conservative fiscal terrorism.
Click to expand...

TANF is a relatively small percentage of federal funds received by the states. For example, Georgia received $329 million in TANF funds and $12.6 billion in military spending. The blue states are not "subsidizing" Georgia because Georgia's tax system has no effect on defense spending.

Tax cuts and low tax rates do not lead to deficit spending unless spending increases faster than revenue which is what happened at the federal level.
 
archives said:
Appears that is exactly what Trump and the GOP have in mind, wasn't any accident that the SALT deduction has nearly disappeared

Just further proves those that cry and whine about what they see as freeloaders are actually talking about themselves
Click to expand...

There once was a time when you could deduct interest paid on loans and credit cards as well as gas taxes but money hungry Democrats killed that.
 
LV426 said:
Which is half the story...that new adjusted poverty rates considers a middle class family that gets breaks on things like tuition, or has children enrolled in sCHIP, as below the poverty rate.

So you're not actually accurate when you say this, and are deliberately painting a false picture by withholding exculpatory information to slime California because it succeeds where every single red state fails.

Every.

Single.

One.
Click to expand...

I did not "slime" California unless you look down states because they are poor. That ranking is according to the Census Bureau rankings. There is no exculpatory information.

https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2016/demo/p60-258.pdf
 
katzgar said:
the net net is trump states are charity cases
Click to expand...

Except the states that are in the bottom 50% of the dependency rankings (least dependent) like TX,KS,MI,FL,OH,NC,NE,UT,WI,ND,IA.

Does that make the blue states that are in the top 50% of the dependency rankings (most dependent) charity cases? Like NM (most dependent), MD,OR,ME, or VT?

I never thought of OR being a charity case.
 
Callinectes Ocasio-Cortez said:
So you jackasses never factored this in when you wanted federal tax rates in the stratosphere? Or when you set your blue state taxes so high you chased your productive people to Texas and Florida? Screw you. Feed me, clothe me and put a roof over my head. I'm ENTITLED to it. What else are you going to do with all that money?
Click to expand...


Holy crap your comment could at least have a vague connection with reality. The people moving from Cali to Texas are the poor https://www.sandiegouniontribune.co...thy-people-per-report-20180221-htmlstory.html and Cali is probably happy to let Texas have them. There is no one productive in Florida...period.
 
CFM said:
I haven't heard the Democrat district in my State cry and whine about freeloaders. They'd be crying and whining about themselves and they aren't about to do that.
Click to expand...

If it is a Red State, Democrat, Republican, Independent, and anyone else living there shouldn't complain, there getting a free ride on the Blue States dime
 
Flash said:
Except the states that are in the bottom 50% of the dependency rankings (least dependent) like TX,KS,MI,FL,OH,NC,NE,UT,WI,ND,IA.

Does that make the blue states that are in the top 50% of the dependency rankings (most dependent) charity cases? Like NM (most dependent), MD,OR,ME, or VT?

I never thought of OR being a charity case.
Click to expand...

How many of those States pay more in Federal Tax than they get back? It is only a handful, and the overwhelming number of those are Blue States
 
katzgar said:
Holy crap your comment could at least have a vague connection with reality. The people moving from Cali to Texas are the poor https://www.sandiegouniontribune.co...thy-people-per-report-20180221-htmlstory.html and Cali is probably happy to let Texas have them. There is no one productive in Florida...period.
Click to expand...

Well, you're KINDA right. It's not the "poor" who are moving out. A single young person might last awhile on an annual salary of $55,000, but a family of 4 out there is not even in the middle class. Those are the people that are moving out, and they're staying in the west(which I can understand). The people moving TO cali are(according to the article)"adults between ages 26 and 35, many with bachelor’s or master’s degree — mostly from New York and from Illinois."
"With this, the face of California is changing into one that looks wealthier and middle-aged." So what I'm hearing is, cali is getting wealthier middle-aged people from high tax eastern blue states(and despite your claim that Florida is not productive, we get a SHITLOAD of yankees down here). So if the rich yankees want to leave the east, just to pay high taxes in a western state, that's cool with me. I guess it's the weather. If I were actually poor though, I might want to go to California. Nice weather, and poor people don't pay taxes
 
Callinectes Ocasio-Cortez said:
Well, you're KINDA right. It's not the "poor" who are moving out. A single young person might last awhile on an annual salary of $55,000, but a family of 4 out there is not even in the middle class. Those are the people that are moving out, and they're staying in the west(which I can understand). The people moving TO cali are(according to the article)"adults between ages 26 and 35, many with bachelor’s or master’s degree — mostly from New York and from Illinois."
"With this, the face of California is changing into one that looks wealthier and middle-aged." So what I'm hearing is, cali is getting wealthier middle-aged people from high tax eastern blue states(and despite your claim that Florida is not productive, we get a SHITLOAD of yankees down here). So if the rich yankees want to leave the east, just to pay high taxes in a western state, that's cool with me. I guess it's the weather. If I were actually poor though, I might want to go to California. Nice weather, and poor people don't pay taxes
Click to expand...


nothing has changed in the last 6 decades, people from flyover are going to the coasts.
 
Flash said:
Except the states that are in the bottom 50% of the dependency rankings (least dependent) like TX,KS,MI,FL,OH,NC,NE,UT,WI,ND,IA.

Does that make the blue states that are in the top 50% of the dependency rankings (most dependent) charity cases? Like NM (most dependent), MD,OR,ME, or VT?

I never thought of OR being a charity case.
Click to expand...

That's because when you travel to Oregon, they give you free weed!

:cig:
 
archives said:
If it is a Red State, Democrat, Republican, Independent, and anyone else living there shouldn't complain, there getting a free ride on the Blue States dime
Click to expand...

Seems the freeloading minorities in the NY districts I posted are getting a free ride. Why do they complain?
 
Flash said:
TANF is a relatively small percentage of federal funds received by the states. For example, Georgia received $329 million in TANF funds and $12.6 billion in military spending. The blue states are not "subsidizing" Georgia because Georgia's tax system has no effect on defense spending.
Click to expand...

So military welfare is the argument you're going with.

Cool. Cool cool cool.
 
Flash said:
Tax cuts and low tax rates do not lead to deficit spending unless spending increases faster than revenue which is what happened at the federal level.
Click to expand...

Tax cuts and low tax rates always lead to deficits. There is no single instance or example ever of lower taxes reducing or eliminating deficits. However, there are plenty of instances and examples of lower taxes creating or expanding deficits. Like the tax cut that was just passed 12 months ago. You remember that one, right? Y'all told us it would pay for itself. SPOILER ALERT: It doesn't.

That has been the strategy since 1980 for Conservatism because Conservatism opposes the institution of government. And since that is an unpopular position to outright state, they weaken and undermine the government by deliberately creating and/or inflating deficits that they then use as an excuse to cut government spending -to which they are ideologically opposed- because they lack the courage, support, and will to repeal it through conventional legislation.

And they've conned you into thinking it's "spending" that is the problem, and not revenue reduction done via tax cuts and low tax rates.

BTW - no business has ever hired a person because their corporate tax rate was cut. Never. Not once.
 
Flash said:
I did not "slime" California unless you look down states because they are poor. That ranking is according to the Census Bureau rankings. There is no exculpatory information.

https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2016/demo/p60-258.pdf
Click to expand...

Sure there is...becuase the adjusted poverty rate is the metric you are using and what goes into that metric results in a middle class family in Encino, whose kid gets a tuition break at UCLA, considered below the poverty line because they get state assistance for tuition.

When you make the distinction that is what goes into the adjusted poverty rate metric you are using, it changes the entire complexion of your argument. Hence, why it's exculpatory, and why you're a bad faith piece of shit for holding that qualifier back.

Conservatives are liars. You lie all the time because you simply don't know any other way to act.

That's the fault of your terrible parents, who raised a shit kid to be a shit adult.
 
LV426 said:
1. I don't believe you have friends.
2. Like you did last November? What happened there?
Click to expand...

1) I don't believe you have investigative abilities. You've proven you don't. Since you were provided the location where you could show those claimed abilities yet were too cowardly to show, just more proof that you lied.

2) My district was red before November, 2018 and it's still red today. It's an easy explanation. A district where I don't live and where none of my friends reside that went from red to blue should explain that. If you don't understand something that simple, it's your fault, BOY.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top