Author Topic: Blue states - Red states Who pays the most taxes? (Read 7716 times)

LurkerNoMore · « **Reply #25 on:** October 07, 2011, 06:21:35 AM »

It's not the liberals fault that they decided to become successful for themselves.

As I already pointed out, the red states have the highest percentage of high school drop outs, teen pregnancy, obese citizens, drug use and other "proud" accomplishments of the like. Maybe if the conservatards got their shit together their state could support themselves.

bears · « **Reply #26 on:** October 07, 2011, 08:37:00 AM »

States Receiving Least in Federal Spending Per Dollar of Federal Taxes Paid:

1. New Jersey ($0.62)
2. Connecticut ($0.64)
3. New Hampshire ($0.68)
4. Nevada ($0.73)
5. Illinois ($0.77)
6. Minnesota ($0.77)
7. Colorado ($0.79)
8. Massachusetts ($0.79)
9. California ($0.81)
10. New York ($0.81)
Two states -- Florida and Oregon (coincidentally, the two closest states in the 2000 Presidential election) -- received $1.00 in federal spending for each $1.00 in federal taxes paid.

and more than half of these states have the worst budget deficits in the country. So , what's your point exactly? Again, you're reading articles from people who are taking a tidbit of information and running wild with assumptions because they know most of their readers are only interested in being spoonfed what they want to hear. disgusting.

bears · « **Reply #27 on:** October 07, 2011, 08:40:00 AM »

and i'm from Illinois. and it's a mess. and this article is saying that IL is sustaining itself without federal aid? what? IL also has the 2nd highest sales tax in the country, and a 10% income tax now. So if IL charges so much in taxes, why do they have one of the biggest deficits in the country?

bears · « **Reply #28 on:** October 07, 2011, 08:41:25 AM »

and don't even get me started on the city of chicago and the cost of doing business there.

LurkerNoMore · « **Reply #29 on:** October 07, 2011, 09:27:34 AM »

Solution : Tax red states more and make those grifting repubs pony up for their own upkeep. Give more funding back to the blue states that pay the most taxes.

George Whorewell · « **Reply #30 on:** October 07, 2011, 10:22:44 AM »

Quote from: BerzerkFury on October 06, 2011, 03:51:59 PM

As someone who lives in CT (and in Fairfield County), I can safely say that this county pulls the entire weight for our bankrupt state as well. And who populates this county? That's right, rich Wall St. guys, hedge fund guys, doctors, lawyers and other very affluent people. Lower Fairfield County is arguably one of the three to five richest parts of the country.

Guess they are giving back.

But let's act shocked that Mississippi, a state with no agricultural prowess, no financial prowess and the highest number of uneducated minorities in the country, receives the most in benefits.

QFT

Also, can anyone explain why the red states who allegedly recieve the most in federal benefits want less benefits, and the idiots in blue states who pay more than anyone else recieve the least? Is fiscal incompetence supposed to be honorable these days? If Red States want less, they should still recieve more? Please explain this justification.

LurkerNoMore · « **Reply #31 on:** October 07, 2011, 10:35:08 AM »

What happens when they receive less benefits?

George Whorewell · « **Reply #32 on:** October 07, 2011, 10:42:57 AM »

Quote from: LurkerNoMore on October 07, 2011, 10:35:08 AM

What happens when they receive less benefits?

Beats me. I couldn't care less. If those states want less, why the fuck should we continue to give them more? I live in NY. I would rather give away less of my money. Shame on me for not being deficient in math and actually wanting my state to get its fiscal house in order. Gosh Darn Selfish Capitalists are ruining this country and especially Mississippi.

bears · « **Reply #33 on:** October 07, 2011, 11:01:19 AM »

Quote from: LurkerNoMore on October 07, 2011, 09:27:34 AM

Solution : Tax red states more and make those grifting repubs pony up for their own upkeep. Give more funding back to the blue states that pay the most taxes.

but tax rates are high in those states. why do they need more money? all this thread proved is that there is no difference between the highest taxed states and the lowest taxed states with regards to the state deficits and who gets what federal aid. it points to 2 things. 1. the mismanagement of funds at the federal level and 2. the income tax rates of states has little to do with the economic viability of those states.

LurkerNoMore · « **Reply #34 on:** October 07, 2011, 11:33:06 AM »

So we all agree that the states getting the most federal funding should be the ones paying the most taxes.

Right? We agree on that?

bears · « **Reply #35 on:** October 07, 2011, 03:33:58 PM »

Quote from: LurkerNoMore on October 07, 2011, 11:33:06 AM

So we all agree that the states getting the most federal funding should be the ones paying the most taxes.

Right? We agree on that?

I don't think you have any idea how you sound right now? I thought government aid should be based on need? Now it sounds like you think it's unfair that those who pay less in tax revenue deserve less in government aid. How white haired conservative of you. Hilarious!

George Whorewell · « **Reply #36 on:** October 07, 2011, 04:45:48 PM »

Quote from: bears on October 07, 2011, 03:33:58 PM

I don't think you have any idea how you sound right now? I thought government aid should be based on need? Now it sounds like you think it's unfair that those who pay less in tax revenue deserve less in government aid. How white haired conservative of you. Hilarious!

DING DING DING

Complete and utter ownage right there-- The reason why conservatives hate socialism and high taxes is exactly the same reason why outraged libs are now upset that some states pay too much and get little back while others pay little and get a lot.

LurkerNoMore · « **Reply #37 on:** October 10, 2011, 05:00:23 AM »

Quote from: bears on October 07, 2011, 03:33:58 PM

I don't think you have any idea how you sound right now? I thought government aid should be based on need? Now it sounds like you think it's unfair that those who pay less in tax revenue deserve less in government aid. How white haired conservative of you. Hilarious!

Which is the exact point of this thread.

How much sarcasm does it take to point this out?

bears · « **Reply #38 on:** October 10, 2011, 09:50:29 AM »

Quote from: LurkerNoMore on October 10, 2011, 05:00:23 AM

Which is the exact point of this thread.

How much sarcasm does it take to point this out?

yeah ok.

Option D · « **Reply #39 on:** October 11, 2011, 01:36:33 PM »

Quote from: LurkerNoMore on October 10, 2011, 05:00:23 AM

Which is the exact point of this thread.

How much sarcasm does it take to point this out?

ding ding ding

LurkerNoMore · « **Reply #40 on:** October 11, 2011, 01:40:33 PM »

Quote from: Option D on October 11, 2011, 01:36:33 PM

ding ding ding

"yeah ok.

"

Skip8282 · « **Reply #41 on:** October 11, 2011, 02:47:26 PM »

Quote from: bears on October 07, 2011, 11:01:19 AM

but tax rates are high in those states. why do they need more money? all this thread proved is that there is no difference between the highest taxed states and the lowest taxed states with regards to the state deficits and who gets what federal aid. it points to 2 things. 1. the mismanagement of funds at the federal level and 2. the income tax rates of states has little to do with the economic viability of those states.

Yeah, the management of the funds is a huge problem. The majority of federal money comes with strings attached. Factor in the need to compete and you tend to see richer localities able to hire more experienced and savvy bidders to do the work (hell some local governments have enough money to have a full time person filling out the applications, etc.).

The whole fucking process is one bureaucratic nightmare and somewhere along the way I think the "need" portion tends to get lost.

bears · « **Reply #42 on:** October 11, 2011, 03:06:29 PM »

Quote from: LurkerNoMore on October 11, 2011, 01:40:33 PM

"yeah ok. "

you're trying to deny the point that you were obviously trying to make and saying you were being "sarcastic"? if you read this thread all the way through anyone with some common sense can see the point that you were trying to make and see that it backfired on you. now you're denying it and saying you were just kidding? thats so fuckin weak.

Soul Crusher · « **Reply #43 on:** October 11, 2011, 03:07:27 PM »

Quote from: bears on October 11, 2011, 03:06:29 PM

you're trying to deny the point that you were obviously trying to make and saying you were being "sarcastic"? if you read this thread all the way through anyone with some common sense can see the point that you were trying to make and see that it backfired on you. now you're denying it and saying you were just kidding? thats so fuckin weak.

Get used to it Lurker is little more than a demo troll.

bears · « **Reply #44 on:** October 11, 2011, 03:09:49 PM »

Quote from: LurkerNoMore on October 06, 2011, 12:03:15 PM

Obviously it is. Although the right wing "know nothings" only addressed one half of the topic.

Why not explain why red states are spending more $$$ than they are paying into the system? The red states can't support themselves? No wonder.

he claims he was just being sarcastic here.

Fury · « **Reply #45 on:** October 11, 2011, 03:12:29 PM »

Quote from: bears on October 11, 2011, 03:09:49 PM

he claims he was just being sarcastic here.

Only because he got bitch-slapped.

He should stick to swinging from 333's nuts.

bears · « **Reply #46 on:** October 11, 2011, 03:13:50 PM »

Quote from: LurkerNoMore on October 06, 2011, 12:03:15 PM

Obviously it is. Although the right wing "know nothings" only addressed one half of the topic.

Why not explain why red states are spending more $$$ than they are paying into the system? The red states can't support themselves? No wonder.

it just gets funnier every time i read it.

he was so intent on bashing the right that he accidentally agreed with one of their most fundamental principles while at the same time blatantly mocking one of the left's most fundamental principles.

Fury · « **Reply #47 on:** October 11, 2011, 03:15:51 PM »

Quote from: bears on October 11, 2011, 03:13:50 PM

it just gets funnier every time i read it.

he was so intent on bashing the right that he accidentally agreed with one of their most fundamental principles while at the same time blatantly mocking one of the left's most fundamental principles.

Far-leftists have a knack for self-owning themselves. It's comical, really. Especially when you take into account the fact that they think they're smarter than everyone else.

tonymctones · « **Reply #48 on:** October 11, 2011, 08:49:58 PM »

LOL epic backfire in this thread.

Option D · « **Reply #49 on:** October 11, 2011, 08:56:32 PM »

Quote from: BerzerkFury on October 11, 2011, 03:15:51 PM

Far-leftists have a knack for self-owning themselves. It's comical, really. Especially when you take into account the fact that they think they're smarter than everyone else.

hahahah and far righters dont?