Reply
Honored Social Butterfly

Top 15 States Which Depend on the Federal Govt. for their Financial Survival

Trump RED states are always complaining about the BLUE states, but in reality, they actually depend on the the BLUE states for their financial survival. The list of states which depend n the federal govt. the most are almost all TRUMP RED states. This is the height of Socialism.

 

Rank

State

 

1

New Mexico

2

Kentucky

3

Mississippi

4

West Virginia

5

Montana

6

Alaska

7

South Carolina

8

Indiana

9

Arizona

10

Wyoming

11

Alabama

12

Louisiana

13

Maine

14

North Dakota

15

Tennessee

 

https://wallethub.com/edu/states-most-least-dependent-on-the-federal-government/2700/#red-vs-blue

Honored Social Butterfly

Gail, this is not complicated. The BLUE states have the highest levels of education amont their residents, the best jobs, and the highest economic productivity.

 

Many of the RED states are just the opposite. Their residents are not highly educated, very often, they do not have good jobs, and they are not economically self sufficient. Because of that, most of the states that depend on Federal Government Welfare are the RED states. And where does that welfare come from? It comes from the BLUE states.

 

Please stop trying to make this more complicated than it needs to be.

Honored Social Butterfly

I thought paying your "fair share" was moral? Y'all are complainers of convenience. 

 

https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/502321-no-blue-states-do-not-bailout-red-states

 

 

 


 


Libs are nuttier than squirrel poop
0 Kudos
120 Views
0
Report
Honored Social Butterfly

Trump RED states are always complaining about the BLUE states, but in reality, they actually depend on the the BLUE states for their financial survival. The list of states which depend n the federal govt. the most are almost all TRUMP RED states. This is the height of Socialism.

 

Rank

State

 

1

New Mexico

2

Kentucky

3

Mississippi

4

West Virginia

5

Montana

6

Alaska

7

South Carolina

8

Indiana

9

Arizona

10

Wyoming

11

Alabama

12

Louisiana

13

Maine

14

North Dakota

15

Tennessee

 

https://wallethub.com/edu/states-most-least-dependent-on-the-federal-government/2700/#red-vs-blue

Honored Social Butterfly


@CriticalThinking wrote:

Trump RED states are always complaining about the BLUE states, but in reality, they actually depend on the the BLUE states for their financial survival. The list of states which depend n the federal govt. the most are almost all TRUMP RED states. This is the height of Socialism.

 

 


Not this AGAIN -

 

Please read my post to you in this same thread - posted on 09-17-2020 at 04:25 PM - in fact it is right below your last post.

How would you change this, if you think it is a problem??

  • Tax lower incomes more?
  • Tax higher incomes less?
  • Should federal resources be allocated to states according to how much they pay in federal taxes ?
  • What programs should be a state/local responsibility and what should be a federal responsibility or a shared responsibility? 
  • What is the fairest way to redistribute federal resources back to the states?

There is a lot of ways this could be interpreted.

There is a lot of ways this could be easily fixed.

Is it a form of wealth redistribution - YES, it is but there could be many reason for it and each could be very easily fixed. 

 

Maybe we need to move around some higher paying occupations and jobs from the blue states to the red states ( red states keep trying to lure them).

 

Maybe red states could send some of their neediest to the blue states -

 

So instead of making it about a redistribution of wealth, it could be a redistribution of people.

 

I like this old Forbes article -

 

Forbes 01/04/2015 - Solved: Why Poor States Are Red and Rich States Are Blue 

. . . . Red states aren't actually poorer in terms of the way people live.

If we measure by consumption patterns then it's the blue states that are poor, the red states that are rich.

 

So there's another solution - blue states should reduce their cost of living.  Then in turn, poorer people could afford to live there and create a more balanced population and equities.  What good does it do a person to make more money if they still cannot afford to live in the area where they might work / play / live. 

 

 

.

 

 

 

Honored Social Butterfly

Let’s point out that trump has certainly made this blue / red differential political. 
How many times has he berated blue states and tried to steer aid away from them, while showing favoritism toward  red states, who voted for him. 
Isn’t the President to reside over all states, whether red or blue?

Honored Social Butterfly

Rank

State

 

1

New Mexico

2

Kentucky

3

Mississippi

4

West Virginia

5

Montana

6

Alaska

7

South Carolina

8

Indiana

9

Arizona

10

Wyoming

11

Alabama

12

Louisiana

13

Maine

14

North Dakota

15

Tennessee

0 Kudos
281 Views
2
Report
Honored Social Butterfly

@CriticalThinking 

 

I think you need to do a little reading on why this happens rather than just enumerate them.

 

States that get the “worst deal”—that is, have the lowest ratio of federal spending to taxes paid—are generally high-income states; these “donor” states also tend to vote for Democrat candidates in national elections. Similarly, many states that get the “best deal” are lower-income states in the mid-west and south with expansive rural areas that tend to vote Republican.

 

This could also be interpret to mean that “red state” lawmakers are more successful at bringing home federal spending than “blue state” lawmakers. It could be said that the way to correct this imbalance is for “blue state” lawmakers to step up efforts to capture additional spending for their states, and for “red state” lawmakers to pare back their voracious appetite for ever-growing spending.

 

Neither of these points are really accurate - The real factor in driving this persistent imbalance between federal taxing and spending is the fact that higher income states bear a larger fraction of the federal tax burden—an imbalance that is sharply amplified by the progressive structure of the federal income tax.

 

For whatever reason, the so-called “blue states” tend to have high-income people that pay the vast majority of federal taxes. The majority of these taxpayers live in wealthy, urban, politically “blue” areas like New York, California, and Massachusetts, among others.

 

Even if federal spending were equal in all states, wealthy states would still send substantially more federal tax dollars to Washington than they received in spending, simply because they earn a majority of the nation’s income.

 

This difference is greatly magnified by the progressive rate structure of the federal income tax, which taxes higher income states (people) more heavily than low-income (people) states, regardless of the level of spending received.

 

The amount of federal revenue collected from state taxpayers depends mostly on state income, and the federal income tax levies higher rates on filers with higher incomes. Progressives designed the federal income tax to burden high-income earners on purpose and support policies to make the federal income tax increasingly weighted toward the wealthy.

 

How would you change this, if you think it is a problem?? (Wallethub)

  • Tax lower incomes more?
  • Tax higher incomes less?
  • Should federal resources be allocated to states according to how much they pay in federal taxes or should some states subsidize others?
  • What programs should be a state/local responsibility and what should be a federal responsibility?
  • What is the fairest way to redistribute federal resources back to the states?

However, the way this pandemic is reeking havoc on many states and depending upon how this maybe somewhat rectified, if rectified - there could be a renumbering of them in the coming years.
Who do you think will need more money to meet their needs in the next few years - West Virginia or New York?

0 Kudos
269 Views
1
Report
Honored Social Butterfly


@GailL1 wrote:

@CriticalThinking 

 

I think you need to do a little reading on why this happens rather than just enumerate them.

 

States that get the “worst deal”—that is, have the lowest ratio of federal spending to taxes paid—are generally high-income states; these “donor” states also tend to vote for Democrat candidates in national elections. Similarly, many states that get the “best deal” are lower-income states in the mid-west and south with expansive rural areas that tend to vote Republican.

 

This could also be interpret to mean that “red state” lawmakers are more successful at bringing home federal spending than “blue state” lawmakers. It could be said that the way to correct this imbalance is for “blue state” lawmakers to step up efforts to capture additional spending for their states, and for “red state” lawmakers to pare back their voracious appetite for ever-growing spending.

 

Neither of these points are really accurate - The real factor in driving this persistent imbalance between federal taxing and spending is the fact that higher income states bear a larger fraction of the federal tax burden—an imbalance that is sharply amplified by the progressive structure of the federal income tax.

 

For whatever reason, the so-called “blue states” tend to have high-income people that pay the vast majority of federal taxes. The majority of these taxpayers live in wealthy, urban, politically “blue” areas like New York, California, and Massachusetts, among others.

 

Even if federal spending were equal in all states, wealthy states would still send substantially more federal tax dollars to Washington than they received in spending, simply because they earn a majority of the nation’s income.

 

This difference is greatly magnified by the progressive rate structure of the federal income tax, which taxes higher income states (people) more heavily than low-income (people) states, regardless of the level of spending received.

 

The amount of federal revenue collected from state taxpayers depends mostly on state income, and the federal income tax levies higher rates on filers with higher incomes. Progressives designed the federal income tax to burden high-income earners on purpose and support policies to make the federal income tax increasingly weighted toward the wealthy.

 

How would you change this, if you think it is a problem?? (Wallethub)

  • Tax lower incomes more?
  • Tax higher incomes less?
  • Should federal resources be allocated to states according to how much they pay in federal taxes or should some states subsidize others?
  • What programs should be a state/local responsibility and what should be a federal responsibility?
  • What is the fairest way to redistribute federal resources back to the states?

However, the way this pandemic is reeking havoc on many states and depending upon how this maybe somewhat rectified, if rectified - there could be a renumbering of them in the coming years.
Who do you think will need more money to meet their needs in the next few years - West Virginia or New York?


The truth is that blue states draw less in aid than Red states. Your post 'rationalizing' why changes none of that.

 

The truth also is that Red states have lower average wages resulting in less taxes being collected, yet more federal aid being drawn by those states.

 

No, people like McConnell (lawmakers) aren't "more successful at bringing home federal spending than “blue state” lawmakers". That is absurd. Red states have lower wages, worse health care statistics and more income and wealth disparity overall than blue states do.

 

BLUE WAVE IN 2020 !!!!!!


Man learns from history that man learns nothing from history.
0 Kudos
109 Views
0
Report
Honored Social Butterfly

Tom, there's no doubt that many RED states depend on the BLUE states for their financial survival. The BLUE states have a much higher level of education and business skills. In the RED states, they depend on the federal government to bail them out economically.

Honored Social Butterfly

The great irony of the many poor red states is they constantly, per FOX and Trump, attack the blue states, which provide financial support for them. Without that support from the blue states, many of Trump's red states would go under financially.

Honored Social Butterfly


@CriticalThinking wrote:

The great irony of the many poor red states is they constantly, per FOX and Trump, attack the blue states, which provide financial support for them. Without that support from the blue states, many of Trump's red states would go under financially.


Hey Critical, have you noticed the large number of topics a small number of left wing posters are posting trying to distract form tRump's miserable record and actions?

 

Kentucky is one of the Red States you speak of. It's McConnell's state, a state that tRump came to to get a republican governor re-elected. That goofy governor lost his election to a Democrat, Andy Beshear. Gee, I hope tRump comes here to Kentucky to support McConnell. ROFLMAO !!!!!


Man learns from history that man learns nothing from history.
Honored Social Butterfly

Kentucky has a long history of voting against their own best interest, however, that may be a changin'

 

Jul 22d, tRump up 27% over Biden, Moscow Mitch up 22% over McGrath

Aug 6th, tRump up  9% over Biden, Moscow Mitch up  5% over McGrath

 

Seems tRump's attack on the Post Office is not playing well, likewise Moscow's refusal to allow any discussion of additional relief for out of work Kentuckians.

 

Honored Social Butterfly

Kentucky,  number 2 !   Moscow Mitch's state, imagine that !


Man learns from history that man learns nothing from history.
Silver Conversationalist

We in NY and NJ demand a refund. If those red state folks want to live on Oxycontin and Coors Lite let them support their own habit.

 

And we've flattened the curve here so we're turning away all .rusty pickups with gun racks and F-Body Camaros.

 

 

 

Nobody knew health care could be so complicated.
Donald Trump
Honored Social Butterfly

No surprise - The appeal of the GOP since 1968 has been their promotion of systemic racism. The main reason those States (exception Maine-that's a puzzler) get the Federal bucks is they are SO racist they trash Unions because Unions get higher wages for ALL their members, including the black ones. Higher wages reduces the need for Federal Assistance but since blacks would benefit along with the Sons of the Confederacy, it was unacceptable to the former Dixiecrats who were Democrats in Name Only, and became Republicans to punish the Democratic Party for the Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts. This after 100 years of voting for their own cadre of racist candidates who would never align with the Party of Lincoln.

 

All the Regressives current blather about THEIR history as supporters of Equality and Capitalist Individualism is hogwash, When Republicans supported equality, THEIR progenitors were racist Dixiecrats who never lost their ancestors penchant for sittin' in the shade watching others work. It's how they support the low taxes that keep their kids in the worst schools and their citizens in the worst healthcare. 

 

Kentucky, Home of Moscow Mitch who is the epitome of the modern Republican Politician, ranks 45th in Education for their kids and much worse for care of the elderly -  51st in health care affordability and access (behind Puerto Rico), 50th in choice of setting and providers, 50th in quality of life and quality of care, 46th in support for family caregivers and 42th in effective nursing home transitions.

 

Honored Social Butterfly

Trump RED states are always complaining about the BLUE states, but in reality, they actually depend on the the BLUE states for their financial survival. The list of states which depend n the federal govt. the most are almost all TRUMP RED states. This is the height of Socialism.

 

Rank

State

 

1

New Mexico

2

Kentucky

3

Mississippi

4

West Virginia

5

Montana

6

Alaska

7

South Carolina

8

Indiana

9

Arizona

10

Wyoming

11

Alabama

12

Louisiana

13

Maine

14

North Dakota

15

Tennessee

Honored Social Butterfly

It it wasn't for the BLUE states, Trump RED states would collapse financially. 

 

Honored Social Butterfly

CriticalThinking:   It it wasn't for the BLUE states, Trump RED states would collapse financially. 

 

 

That's very true CT. I'd love to hear their explanation for why these longtime red states do so poorly when they sell themselves as financial wizards that know better than Democrats how to manage an economy. One would think by now their expertise would have made those states the envy of the free world instead of being lucky to have paved roads and trash collection.

Honored Social Butterfly

@Panjandrum 

Sure does make one question the supposed “financial wizardry” by the repubs doesn’t it. 
Plus, trump always rails on California and New York, but they are a couple of the larger blue state donors that help the red states...just another repub slight of hand. 

And mitch really brings home the bacon doesn’t he...from blue states!

Honored Social Butterfly

Surprise! Not.
cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Users
Announcements

Does AARP donate to political parties or endorse candidates?

AARP is strictly non-partisan and always has been. We never endorse or donate to candidates, political parties or political action committees.

Learn more.

AARP Members Only Games

Play members only games, like FIll Ins, Lumeno, 2048 and a collaborative, multiplayer Let's Crossword.

Play Now
AARP Members Only Games Logos
AARP Rewards

Solve Crosswords. Earn Rewards. Activate AARP Rewards to earn points for games, quizzes and videos. Redeem for deals and discounts.

Get started with AARP Rewards now!
/html/assets/Rewards-program-badge-355x224.png