Red States take more than Blue States

So I read a meme on twitter and I couldn't possibly believe it. With good reason most memes are complete BS, especially ones with quotes or statistics. It went like this:

If Liberals are such "lazy moochers" then tell me:
Why are 95% of the poorest counties Republican?
Why are 8 out of the 10 poorest states Republican?
Why do Red States take more money from the federal government than they pay?
Remind me again who the real "Takers" are!

Now half of that is nonsense or scewered to ignore the fact that there are Democrats in Red States and Republicans in Blue States.
But the last one is true. Red States receive a higher return on their federal income-tax contributions than Blue States.
Oddly enough, Senator Rand Paul's Kentucky is the most federally dependent state in America.

On a scale of 1 to 50, 1 being more dependent on the federal government. The average score for Blue States is 34 and for Red States is 20. It just seems like being more dependent on the federal government isn't conservative at all and yet the Democrats are the ones who are less dependent on the federal government.

Anyway, I found this research interesting: "2017’s Most & Least Federally Dependent States"
Link Below:wallethub.com...

originally posted by: GokuVsSuperman0
Oddly enough, Senator Rand Paul's Kentucky is the most federally dependent state in America.

You, obviously, have not visited 'Looterville, KY' and seen the _problem_ first-hand.

You can call KY a red state if you like, but this place is anything but Conservative.

a reply to: GokuVsSuperman0

Red States receive a higher return on their federal income-tax contributions than Blue States.

That just sounds like winning

But alas, the OP's claim is based on false BS.

The problem with both of those claims is that it doesn’t get to the heart of what “mooching” is. The problem with the first claim is that federal spending is made up mostly of defense expenditures at both the federal level and the state level. Defense is not welfare. Actual welfare and poverty programs only amount to about 10% of the expenditures at the federal level. Now if a state received only funds for poverty programs, then you could claim that it is a welfare state. But unfortunately for their argument, this is not this case. PBS states, “In all but a handful of states, Department of Defense dollars account for by far the majority of federal dollars.” (Other big ticket items that round out the list for state money from the federal government include farm subsidies, retirement programs and infrastructure projects) It’s simply a function of flowing from the states without large defense operations and retired people to the states with them. If a less populated state has a large military base with a legion of personnel conducting operations should we be surprised that there might be an imbalance of funds? No, because it is a government organization that is not producing goods, but is consuming ammo, gas, food, electricity, salaries etc.. Also, most states don’t tax military paychecks, which would somewhat offset the federal expenditure, so overall there is going to be a net draw of funds. But more to the point, national defense is a common good that benefits the whole country, so it can hardly be classified as mooching.

a reply to: Snarl
Hmm,63% of the people in Kentucky voted for Trump. How is it not a red state?

a reply to: Snarl

True statement, because I live here!
There are just some parts of town that anyone in their right minds avoids like the plague!

originally posted by: GokuVsSuperman0
a reply to: Snarl
Hmm,63% of the people in Kentucky voted for Trump. How is it not a red state?

KY is a fairly rural part of the US. No one was much interested in the woman who campaigned in her Communist attire ... nor was she much interested in us.

a reply to: GokuVsSuperman0

This data is relesed by the federal government I believe.

And it certainly is interesting.

Another interesting stat are states with the most people on food stamps.

www.usatoday.com...

Louisiana, Tennessee, Oregon, West Virginia, New Mexico, Mississippi, DC all states with the most food stamp recipients per capita.

WalletHub’s analysts compared the 50 states

Get it ?
Got it.
Good
Next

originally posted by: GokuVsSuperman0
a reply to: Snarl
Hmm,63% of the people in Kentucky voted for Trump. How is it not a red state?

People who live out in the country tend to vote conservative but city folks overwhelmingly vote liberal. "Looterville" (Louisville) voted overwhelmingly Blue- and has the highest crime (specifically homicide, drug and gang violence) statistics in the state. Also from my own personal work experience has more people on public assistance than I've ever seen anywhere I've ever lived before.

white people will vote against their own interest just to stick it to the other guy. there are WAY more whites who need assistance.

if you're black or an immigrant and receive entitlement = bad.

if you're white and receive entitlements = good

so gross...

glad I live in a blue state!

Obamacare won't be repealed because the red states need it most. LOL

There are a lot of things at play for cause so this isn't really cut and dry.

But, part of the problem is conservatives will often pass budgets beyond their revanu andrefuse to raise taxes.

Sometimes raising taxes is actually the conservative thing to do believe it or not.

a reply to: GokuVsSuperman0

Do you want to crunch numbers and read blogs... or have a real talk about QUALITY OF LIFE in blue vs red states.

I've lived in California, and I've lived in Texas... take a guess which one is better.

One group of residents has Stockholm Syndrome.

The other has nice affordable housing, great food, clean streets, low crime, and a booming skilled trade and corporate climate.

originally posted by: GeauxHomeYoureDrunk
"Looterville" (Louisville) ... Also from my own personal work experience has more people on public assistance than I've ever seen anywhere I've ever lived before.

I honestly think Hawaii was far worse.

It'd be pretty funny to see what would happen if a law was passed that said, "If you register or vote Democrat ... no public assistance for you."

a reply to: MarkOfTheV

Which one is which I have been pushed out of both states?

Made a good deal in Austin but the infrastructure is basically collapsed. It may as well be LA.

I think it's why when Trump threatened to cut off California's federal funding if they didn't do something about the cities that accept immigrants, and California turned around and said okay, we'll stop paying our federal taxes then, that Trump backed off this one quickly, because he's got a real problem on his hand if the Blue States stop paying into the federal tax pot. The very federal tax dependent red states would go off a cliff edge fast.

a reply to: luthier

That's a really vague argument so you'll need to be more specific...

Tough competition in Texas... there's going to be fallout from failed businesses and ideas.

a reply to: MarkOfTheV

Tough competition? How about peak housing return on investment is over. Your late to the party.


What I am referring to is that the major cities have traffic and water problems.

That I don't enjoy sitting in 3 hours of traffic a day.

a reply to: luthier

Yeah you're still not being coherent...

Find a way to get your knee to stop jerking... think about what you want to say and how you want to express it, and then write it down.... then proofread.

Numbers can be used to tell any story you want to hear.
These stats are not based off of personal welfare.

a reply to: MarkOfTheV

Well perhaps your comprehension isn't where it needs to be to get it.