The myth of the red state welfare queens.

giphy.gif
 
Still waiting for one of you liberals to try to refute this. I've noticed that you guys either clam up, or hurl insults and try to deflect the conversation, when confronted with the facts.
 
I can only count ONE state perhaps that could be called red on this top 15 welfare recipient states. The data Liberals shove around is FALSE.

FACTS: The Biggest US Welfare States

15. Oregon
% of pop. on assistance: 1.55%
2007 spending: $83.85 million
Total recipients (July 2008): 58,831
% Change in past 12 months: +27.2%
Unemployment (May 2009): 12.4%

14. Pennsylvania
% of pop. on assistance: 1.60%
2007 spending: $247.29 million
Total recipients (July 2008): 198,666
% Change in past 12 months: -1.7%
Unemployment (May 2009): 8.2%

13. Michigan
% of pop. on assistance: 1.65%
2007 spending: $380.93 million
Total recipients (July 2008): 164,589
% Change in past 12 months: -4.8%
Unemployment (May 2009): 14.1%

12. Rhode Island
% of pop. on assistance: 1.79%
2007 spending: $57.4 million
Total recipients (July 2008): 18,839
% Change in past 12 months: N/A
Unemployment (May 2009): 12.1%

Tie-10. Indiana
% of pop. on assistance: 1.83%
2007 spending: $102.27 million
Total recipients (July 2008): 116,430
% Change in past 12 months: -5.3%
Unemployment (May 2009): 10.6%

Tie-10. New Mexico
% of pop. on assistance: 1.83%
2007 spending: $58.87 million
Total recipients (July 2008): 36,322
% Change in past 12 months: +20%
Unemployment (May 2009): 6.5%

9. Washington
% of pop. on assistance: 1.86%
2007 spending: $265.88 million
Total recipients (July 2008): 121,864
% Change in past 12 months: 18.4%
Unemployment (May 2009): 9.4%

8. Minnesota
% of pop. on assistance: 1.88%
2007 spending: $106.29 million
Total recipients (July 2008): 98,028
% Change in past 12 months: 5.9%
Unemployment (May 2009): 8.2%

7. New York
% of pop. on assistance: 1.92%
2007 spending: $1.47 billion
Total recipients (July 2008): 373,305
% Change in past 12 months: 1.2%
Unemployment (May 2009): 8.2%

6. District of Columbia
% of pop. on assistance: 1.99%
2007 spending: $18.67 million
Total recipients (July 2008): 11,806
% Change in past 12 months: -6.3%
Unemployment (May 2009): 10.7%

5. Vermont
% of pop. on assistance: 2.02%
2007 spending: $30.92 milliion
Total recipients (July 2008): 12,543
% Change in past 12 months: 7.3%
Unemployment (May 2009): 7.3%

4. Massachusetts
% of pop. on assistance: 2.09%
2007 spending: $295.29 million
Total recipients (July 2008): 136,033
% Change in past 12 months: 5.4%
Unemployment (May 2009): 8.2%

3. Tennessee
% of pop. on assistance: 2.15%
2007 spending: $91.28 million
Total recipients (July 2008): 133,505
% Change in past 12 months: 5.7%
Unemployment (May 2009): 10.7%

2. Maine
% of pop. on assistance: 2.37%
2007 spending: $61.73 million
Total recipients (July 2008): 31,148
% Change in past 12 months: 5.3%
Unemployment (May 2009): 8.3%

1. California
% of pop. on assistance: 3.30%
2007 spending: $3.28 billion
Total recipients (July 2008): 1,212,893
% Change in past 12 months: 10.4%
Unemployment (May 2009): 11.5%

https://www.cnbc.com/2009/07/21/The-Biggest-US-Welfare-States.html?slide=2
 
Last edited:
The Ugly Truth said:
Still waiting for one of you liberals to try to refute this. I've noticed that you guys either clam up, or hurl insults and try to deflect the conversation, when confronted with the facts.
Click to expand...

mostly we ignore posts when they are on this level. the vulpine types are often too crazy to deal with.
 
We say it because that's what the statistics are. Go ahead now. You can try, and blame African Americans, and illegal immigrants now.
 
Nordberg said:
mostly we ignore posts when they are on this level. the vulpine types are often too crazy to deal with.
Click to expand...

True dat. I normally don't even bother reading fully from them. Reading what Evince quoted tells me why. American Thinker? That's an oxymoron.
 
https://www.usatoday.com/story/mone...-sheet-states-with-most-food-stamps/21877399/

from your yahoo search link


A taxpayer's view of the welfare system depends on many factors — his or her upbringing, personal experiences, and even where he or she lives. In some areas of the country, food stamp use is more common than in others.
We've created a list of the states that have the most food stamp recipients per capita. To determine the states on this list, we used the USDA Food Nutrition Service's most recent state-by-state data, coupled with population data from the Census Bureau. States with the highest number of food stamp participants relative to population ranked highest. We've also included a state-by-state breakdown of food stamp use in all 50 states and the District of Columbia
States with the most people on food stamps:
7. Louisiana
• Number of food stamp recipients: 868,192
• Percentage of the state's population on food stamps: 18.67%
• Total cost of just these benefits alone (That is, how much do just the money on those EBT cards cost the state): Around $107.4 million
• Cost of benefits alone per capita in this state: $23.10
6. Tennessee
• Number of food stamp recipients: Just over 1.28 million
• Percentage of the state's population on food stamps: 19.58%
• Total cost of just these benefits alone (That is, how much do just the money on those EBT cards cost the state?): Around $158.7 million
• Cost of benefits alone per capita in this state: $24.23
5. Oregon
• Number of food stamp recipients: 791,222
• Percentage of the state's population on food stamps: 19.93%
• Total cost of just these benefits alone (That is, how much do just the money on those EBT cards cost the state?): Around $98 million
• Cost of benefits alone per capita in this state: $24.66 per person
4. West Virginia
• Number of food stamp recipients: 369,249
• Percentage of the state's population on food stamps: 19.96%
• Total cost of just these benefits alone (That is, how much do just the money on those EBT cards cost the state?): Around $45.7 million
• Cost of benefits alone per capita in this state: $24.69 per person
3. New Mexico
• Number of food stamp recipients: 448,328
• Percentage of the state's population on food stamps: 21.5%
• Total cost of just these benefits alone (That is, how much do just the money on those EBT cards cost the state?): Around $55.5 million
• Cost of benefits alone per capita in this state: $26.60 per person
2. Mississippi
• Number of food stamp recipients: 650,911
• Percentage of the state's population on food stamps: 21.74%
• Total cost of just these benefits alone (That is, how much do just the money on those EBT cards cost the state?): Around $80.5 million
• Estimated cost of benefits alone per capita in this state: $26.90 per person
1. District of Columbia
• Number of food stamp recipients: 144,768
• Percentage of the state's population on food stamps: 21.97%
• Total cost of just these benefits alone (That is, how much do just the money on those EBT cards cost the state?): Around $18 million
• Estimated cost of benefits alone per capita in this state: $27.19 per person
 
Truth Detector said:
I can only count ONE state perhaps that could be called red on this top 15 welfare recipient states. The data Liberals shove around is FALSE.

FACTS: The Biggest US Welfare States

15. Oregon
% of pop. on assistance: 1.55%
2007 spending: $83.85 million
Total recipients (July 2008): 58,831
% Change in past 12 months: +27.2%
Unemployment (May 2009): 12.4%

14. Pennsylvania
% of pop. on assistance: 1.60%
2007 spending: $247.29 million
Total recipients (July 2008): 198,666
% Change in past 12 months: -1.7%
Unemployment (May 2009): 8.2%

13. Michigan
% of pop. on assistance: 1.65%
2007 spending: $380.93 million
Total recipients (July 2008): 164,589
% Change in past 12 months: -4.8%
Unemployment (May 2009): 14.1%

12. Rhode Island
% of pop. on assistance: 1.79%
2007 spending: $57.4 million
Total recipients (July 2008): 18,839
% Change in past 12 months: N/A
Unemployment (May 2009): 12.1%

Tie-10. Indiana
% of pop. on assistance: 1.83%
2007 spending: $102.27 million
Total recipients (July 2008): 116,430
% Change in past 12 months: -5.3%
Unemployment (May 2009): 10.6%

Tie-10. New Mexico
% of pop. on assistance: 1.83%
2007 spending: $58.87 million
Total recipients (July 2008): 36,322
% Change in past 12 months: +20%
Unemployment (May 2009): 6.5%

9. Washington
% of pop. on assistance: 1.86%
2007 spending: $265.88 million
Total recipients (July 2008): 121,864
% Change in past 12 months: 18.4%
Unemployment (May 2009): 9.4%

8. Minnesota
% of pop. on assistance: 1.88%
2007 spending: $106.29 million
Total recipients (July 2008): 98,028
% Change in past 12 months: 5.9%
Unemployment (May 2009): 8.2%

7. New York
% of pop. on assistance: 1.92%
2007 spending: $1.47 billion
Total recipients (July 2008): 373,305
% Change in past 12 months: 1.2%
Unemployment (May 2009): 8.2%

6. District of Columbia
% of pop. on assistance: 1.99%
2007 spending: $18.67 million
Total recipients (July 2008): 11,806
% Change in past 12 months: -6.3%
Unemployment (May 2009): 10.7%

5. Vermont
% of pop. on assistance: 2.02%
2007 spending: $30.92 milliion
Total recipients (July 2008): 12,543
% Change in past 12 months: 7.3%
Unemployment (May 2009): 7.3%

4. Massachusetts
% of pop. on assistance: 2.09%
2007 spending: $295.29 million
Total recipients (July 2008): 136,033
% Change in past 12 months: 5.4%
Unemployment (May 2009): 8.2%

3. Tennessee
% of pop. on assistance: 2.15%
2007 spending: $91.28 million
Total recipients (July 2008): 133,505
% Change in past 12 months: 5.7%
Unemployment (May 2009): 10.7%

2. Maine
% of pop. on assistance: 2.37%
2007 spending: $61.73 million
Total recipients (July 2008): 31,148
% Change in past 12 months: 5.3%
Unemployment (May 2009): 8.3%

1. California
% of pop. on assistance: 3.30%
2007 spending: $3.28 billion
Total recipients (July 2008): 1,212,893
% Change in past 12 months: 10.4%
Unemployment (May 2009): 11.5%

https://search.yahoo.com/search;_yl...iev+the+most+welfare&fr2=sb-top&fr=yfp-t&fp=1
Click to expand...



your link does not take one to that information you posted lie heap
 
evince said:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/mone...-sheet-states-with-most-food-stamps/21877399/

from your yahoo search link


A taxpayer's view of the welfare system depends on many factors — his or her upbringing, personal experiences, and even where he or she lives. In some areas of the country, food stamp use is more common than in others.
We've created a list of the states that have the most food stamp recipients per capita. To determine the states on this list, we used the USDA Food Nutrition Service's most recent state-by-state data, coupled with population data from the Census Bureau. States with the highest number of food stamp participants relative to population ranked highest. We've also included a state-by-state breakdown of food stamp use in all 50 states and the District of Columbia
States with the most people on food stamps:
7. Louisiana
• Number of food stamp recipients: 868,192
• Percentage of the state's population on food stamps: 18.67%
• Total cost of just these benefits alone (That is, how much do just the money on those EBT cards cost the state): Around $107.4 million
• Cost of benefits alone per capita in this state: $23.10
6. Tennessee
• Number of food stamp recipients: Just over 1.28 million
• Percentage of the state's population on food stamps: 19.58%
• Total cost of just these benefits alone (That is, how much do just the money on those EBT cards cost the state?): Around $158.7 million
• Cost of benefits alone per capita in this state: $24.23
5. Oregon
• Number of food stamp recipients: 791,222
• Percentage of the state's population on food stamps: 19.93%
• Total cost of just these benefits alone (That is, how much do just the money on those EBT cards cost the state?): Around $98 million
• Cost of benefits alone per capita in this state: $24.66 per person
4. West Virginia
• Number of food stamp recipients: 369,249
• Percentage of the state's population on food stamps: 19.96%
• Total cost of just these benefits alone (That is, how much do just the money on those EBT cards cost the state?): Around $45.7 million
• Cost of benefits alone per capita in this state: $24.69 per person
3. New Mexico
• Number of food stamp recipients: 448,328
• Percentage of the state's population on food stamps: 21.5%
• Total cost of just these benefits alone (That is, how much do just the money on those EBT cards cost the state?): Around $55.5 million
• Cost of benefits alone per capita in this state: $26.60 per person
2. Mississippi
• Number of food stamp recipients: 650,911
• Percentage of the state's population on food stamps: 21.74%
• Total cost of just these benefits alone (That is, how much do just the money on those EBT cards cost the state?): Around $80.5 million
• Estimated cost of benefits alone per capita in this state: $26.90 per person
1. District of Columbia
• Number of food stamp recipients: 144,768
• Percentage of the state's population on food stamps: 21.97%
• Total cost of just these benefits alone (That is, how much do just the money on those EBT cards cost the state?): Around $18 million
• Estimated cost of benefits alone per capita in this state: $27.19 per person
Click to expand...




this is the first link on the SEARCH he provided a link to


he lied about his link after giving a rightwing trash site link
 
It looks like several of you didn't even read the OP. This myth is based on how states voted for the most recent President. This has nothing to do with how a state is run. It does not mention which governors, mayors and Representatives were elected at the state level. In other words, it's junk science. Take W. Virginia, for instance. Between 1980 and 2013, they have elected nothing but democrat Senators, 81 percent for Representatives, and 76 percent for governors. That is why they are in the top ten worst states. Look at the other states and see how they voted during the same time period. Idiots!
 
aloysious said:
.Right on cue! Amazingly predictable.
Click to expand...

We aren't going to give someone that acts like he does, the satisfaction of proper dialogue. With his usual hating, from Muslims, to Catholics, to immigrants, he isn't worth a drop of spit in a bucket, towards intellectual discussion. He gets what's on his level, and based on what he delivers. The fact we even engage these types at all, is an act of generosity. I give a little, in hopes it keeps em busy, and on the internet, rather than having angry sociopaths roaming around their neighborhoods.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top