choomer
Well-Known Member
FIFY
Why do detractors constantly fail to argue against policy?
- Thread starter Padawanbater2
- Start date
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
Very interesting map. That raises a lot of questions
SneekyNinja
Well-Known Member
Except the biggest net drain States are red states, always.
choomer
Well-Known Member
Really?
Here’s a straightforward list of the top ten states with the highest expenditures on public welfare. Note the enormous difference between California and New York and the rest of the country.
1. California - $103 Billion
2. New York - $61.4 Billion
3. Texas - $35.4 Billion
4. Florida - $27.2 Billion
5. Pennsylvania - $26.7 Billion
6. Illinois - $21 Billion
7. Ohio - $20 Billion
8. Massachusetts - $18.6 Billion
9. New Jersey - $17.3 Billion
10. Michigan - $16.3 Billion
Here’s an interesting fact for you. The top ten states listed above spend more on public welfare ($346.9B) than all of the bottom forty states (plus the District of Columbia) combined ($262.7B). Regardless of how populated any particular state is, you want to pay attention to these numbers because they foreshadow future budget problems. When you consider the fact that many states run operating deficits and have enormous debt problems, you begin to wonder if some of these numbers are sustainable for the long term.
It helps to source a statement like yours above or else it looks like that statement is being pulled directly from your ass.
Last edited:
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
funny how I could read that.
No, I meant prosperity. Red states keep doing the wrong things, such as way under-funding education, infrastructure to maintain low taxes. They get what they pay for, which is a third world economy. The only reason they have anything at all is because prosperous regions throw them some bones. California, for instance, has a world class economy and is expanding because it invests in its people, schools, environment and infrastructure.
Your "correction" stinks of jealousy. You can stew in that.
SneekyNinja
Well-Known Member
Net drain, dumbass.Really?
Here’s a straightforward list of the top ten states with the highest expenditures on public welfare. Note the enormous difference between California and New York and the rest of the country.
1. California - $103 Billion
2. New York - $61.4 Billion
3. Texas - $35.4 Billion
4. Florida - $27.2 Billion
5. Pennsylvania - $26.7 Billion
6. Illinois - $21 Billion
7. Ohio - $20 Billion
8. Massachusetts - $18.6 Billion
9. New Jersey - $17.3 Billion
10. Michigan - $16.3 Billion
Here’s an interesting fact for you. The top ten states listed above spend more on public welfare ($346.9B) than all of the bottom forty states (plus the District of Columbia) combined ($262.7B). Regardless of how populated any particular state is, you want to pay attention to these numbers because they foreshadow future budget problems. When you consider the fact that many states run operating deficits and have enormous debt problems, you begin to wonder if some of these numbers are sustainable for the long term.
It helps to source a statement like yours above or else it looks like that statement is being pulled directly from your ass.
(Compare it to revenue generated, there, I even included a hint)
choomer
Well-Known Member
Do your own homework and cite the source, or keep speaking from your hindquarters.
choomer
Well-Known Member
Think what you wish (you shall anyway) and keep coming back with only your conjecture to substantiate your claims (or is it that inability to understand the written word that's giving you trouble?).
Let me help:
Definition of disparate
1 : markedly distinct in quality or character
2 : containing or made up of fundamentally different and often incongruous elements
—
disparately
adverb
—
disparateness
noun
—
disparity
noun
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
Mooch knows the cost of everything and the value of nothing.
choomer
Well-Known Member
How true.
I like pointing out the value of your contribution best.
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
what language is that?
ginjawarrior
Well-Known Member
zeddd
Well-Known Member
Dismiss
Unclebaldrick
Well-Known Member
You can't just make up a question out of no evidence whatsoever and then demand an answer to it in order to disprove it, dimwit. That just isn't the way logic works. How about you show me the proof? Perhaps you can use some of the evidence that your moron president has presented after setting up a commission to "investigate" it at taxpayer expense. Oh wait, there is none. Just a collection of assholes "investigating" a narcissistic asshole's charges while drawing a hefty paycheck for pretending to do so and demanding that every state send them their complete voting rolls on an unsecured website. Drain that swamp, jizz-rag!Post your source that answers that question then.
Or insult me some more as that is always a quintessential way to convince people that you're a thinking person with opinion worth listening to.
You really are a stupid knee-jerk fuck-bag. I can refute your assertion and insult you. You are a dotard.
Last edited:
Heil Tweetler
Well-Known Member
whose stupid now©?
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
Two thirds of all 2016 presidential campaigning was spent in six states
94% of the 2016 presidential campaigning was in 12 states
The skewed attention to only a few states is entirely driven by the Electoral College.
http://www.nationalpopularvote.com/half-presidential-campaign-only-5-states-33-states-totally-ignored
National popular vote will end this archaic remnant of the days of chattel slavery. No change to the constitution is needed and not even a majority of states need to pass this law to end the EC as it currently exists.
Last edited:
choomer
Well-Known Member
You came with data and I gotta appreciate that you source your data, but let's see if Squeaky is correct.
State welfare exp. federal dep % for gen rev. How much is that? political alignment for 2014
1. California - $103 Billion 26% $103B*.26= $26.78B D
2. New York - $61.4 Billion 32.8% $61.4B*.328=$20.1B D
3. Texas - $35.4 Billion 31.8% $35.4B*.318=$11.2B R
4. Florida - $27.2 Billion 33.2% $27.2B*.332=$9B D
5. Pennsylvania - $26.7 Billion 30.8% $26.7B*.308=$8.2B D
6. Illinois - $21 Billion 26.8% $21B*.268=$5.6B D
7. Ohio - $20 Billion 35% $20B*.35=$7B D
8. Massachusetts - $18.6 Billion 27.8% $18.6*.278=$5.1B D
9. New Jersey - $17.3 Billion 27.3% $17.3B*.273=$4.7B D
10. Michigan - $16.3 Billion 32.3% $16.3*.323=$5.26B D
and for fun comparison the most dependent on federal aid:
11. Mississippi $5.8 Billion 40.1% $5.8*.401=$2.32B R
<political alignment map for 2014 courtesy of http://www.peteradz.com/2014/2014-red-blue-political-map-usa>
As you can see, a higher percentage of subsidization DOES NOT MEAN more money from the federal gov't, aka "drain".
Try again?
choomer
Well-Known Member
That's not a nice way to refer to Robert Mueller's Russian collusion investigation!
But it is pretty much on the nose.