Income Redistribution."Red States Get Fat, Blue States get Fleeced

[rdean]

Some States Get Fat, Others Fleeced - by Nate Bailey - Budget & Tax News

"All taxpayers know that the federal government uses tax and spending policy to redistribute income from citizens with high incomes to those who make little," said study author Curtis Dubay, a Tax Foundation economist. "Citizens are less aware of geographically based income redistribution."

---------------------

We need to put to bed the "myth" that Red States are "self-sufficient". Facts prove they are merely "subsidized".

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The government should not use taxes to make policy. Period.

 

[rdean]

The government should not use taxes to make policy. Period.

If right wingers had their way, we would be the wild west. We are the top technological country in the world because of our government creating and funding NASA. Republicans want to tear that down and replace it with what? Gravel roads? Religion? Guns? What a bunch of loons. Seriously. What do they add to the country? Besides failed policies. The mess the country is in is from 8 years of Bush.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The government should not use taxes to make policy. Period.

If right wingers had their way, we would be the wild west. We are the top technological country in the world because of our government creating and funding NASA. Republicans want to tear that down and replace it with what? Gravel roads? Religion? Guns? What a bunch of loons. Seriously. What do they add to the country? Besides failed policies. The mess the country is in is from 8 years of Bush.

It amazes me how you can mix in a small grain of truth and ignore the large grains. NASA's biggest enemy for years was a guy named William Proxmire, a Democrat from Wisconsin. In fact, he was so famous for dumping on science for political gain that the practice is actually named after him. Does that make Democrats anti-science, or does in make you an idiot?

My guess is both.

 

[DiveCon]

The government should not use taxes to make policy. Period.

If right wingers had their way, we would be the wild west. We are the top technological country in the world because of our government creating and funding NASA. Republicans want to tear that down and replace it with what? Gravel roads? Religion? Guns? What a bunch of loons. Seriously. What do they add to the country? Besides failed policies. The mess the country is in is from 8 years of Bush.

It amazes me how you can mix in a small grain of truth and ignore the large grains. NASA's biggest enemy for years was a guy named William Proxmire, a Democrat from Wisconsin. In fact, he was so famous for dumping on science for political gain that the practice is actually named after him. Does that make Democrats anti-science, or does in make you an idiot?

My guess is both.

the "golden fleece" awards?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

If right wingers had their way, we would be the wild west. We are the top technological country in the world because of our government creating and funding NASA. Republicans want to tear that down and replace it with what? Gravel roads? Religion? Guns? What a bunch of loons. Seriously. What do they add to the country? Besides failed policies. The mess the country is in is from 8 years of Bush.

It amazes me how you can mix in a small grain of truth and ignore the large grains. NASA's biggest enemy for years was a guy named William Proxmire, a Democrat from Wisconsin. In fact, he was so famous for dumping on science for political gain that the practice is actually named after him. Does that make Democrats anti-science, or does in make you an idiot?

My guess is both.

the "golden fleece" awards?

You got it in one. I used to hate that guy with a passion. If he had not been around we would have had a moon colony years ago, and been on Mars by now. Because of him I will never get into space, and that still makes my blood boil. He is the only person in the universe that has ever made rdean look intelligent. In comparison to Proxmire rdean is an Einstain.

Sorry, ranted a bit there. He has been dead for 5 or 6 years and he still gets under my skin.

 

[Trajan]

Some States Get Fat, Others Fleeced - by Nate Bailey - Budget & Tax News

"All taxpayers know that the federal government uses tax and spending policy to redistribute income from citizens with high incomes to those who make little," said study author Curtis Dubay, a Tax Foundation economist. "Citizens are less aware of geographically based income redistribution."

---------------------

We need to put to bed the "myth" that Red States are "self-sufficient". Facts prove they are merely "subsidized".

you should take a look at what a blue state and red state are/is before flying off the handle.

 

[DiveCon]

Some States Get Fat, Others Fleeced - by Nate Bailey - Budget & Tax News

"All taxpayers know that the federal government uses tax and spending policy to redistribute income from citizens with high incomes to those who make little," said study author Curtis Dubay, a Tax Foundation economist. "Citizens are less aware of geographically based income redistribution."

---------------------

We need to put to bed the "myth" that Red States are "self-sufficient". Facts prove they are merely "subsidized".

you should take a look at what a blue state and red state are/is before flying off the handle.

yeah, cause what idiots like dean fail to account for is military bases, federal land holdings and other thing that cost the federal government money to the states in pure maintenance fees

 

[rdean]

The government should not use taxes to make policy. Period.

If right wingers had their way, we would be the wild west. We are the top technological country in the world because of our government creating and funding NASA. Republicans want to tear that down and replace it with what? Gravel roads? Religion? Guns? What a bunch of loons. Seriously. What do they add to the country? Besides failed policies. The mess the country is in is from 8 years of Bush.

It amazes me how you can mix in a small grain of truth and ignore the large grains. NASA's biggest enemy for years was a guy named William Proxmire, a Democrat from Wisconsin. In fact, he was so famous for dumping on science for political gain that the practice is actually named after him. Does that make Democrats anti-science, or does in make you an idiot?

My guess is both.

The Democratic Party is a coalition. Of course there are right wing loons that are part of the party. We call them "Blue Dogs".

Name two liberals in the Republican Party.

You see, the reason you can point to a single Democrat and say "They all share that point of view" is because that is your "experience". The Republican Party is 90% white and mostly Christian. They really do share a single point of view on MOST things. Democrats do not. Democratic positions are the result of a "consensus".

I don't understand why this is so difficult to comprehend.

 

[rdean]

Some States Get Fat, Others Fleeced - by Nate Bailey - Budget & Tax News

"All taxpayers know that the federal government uses tax and spending policy to redistribute income from citizens with high incomes to those who make little," said study author Curtis Dubay, a Tax Foundation economist. "Citizens are less aware of geographically based income redistribution."

---------------------

We need to put to bed the "myth" that Red States are "self-sufficient". Facts prove they are merely "subsidized".

you should take a look at what a blue state and red state are/is before flying off the handle.

Any examples? Links?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Thought so.

 

[DiveCon]

If right wingers had their way, we would be the wild west. We are the top technological country in the world because of our government creating and funding NASA. Republicans want to tear that down and replace it with what? Gravel roads? Religion? Guns? What a bunch of loons. Seriously. What do they add to the country? Besides failed policies. The mess the country is in is from 8 years of Bush.

It amazes me how you can mix in a small grain of truth and ignore the large grains. NASA's biggest enemy for years was a guy named William Proxmire, a Democrat from Wisconsin. In fact, he was so famous for dumping on science for political gain that the practice is actually named after him. Does that make Democrats anti-science, or does in make you an idiot?

My guess is both.

The Democratic Party is a coalition. Of course there are right wing loons that are part of the party. We call them "Blue Dogs".

Name two liberals in the Republican Party.

You see, the reason you can point to a single Democrat and say "They all share that point of view" is because that is your "experience". The Republican Party is 90% white and mostly Christian. They really do share a single point of view on MOST things. Democrats do not. Democratic positions are the result of a "consensus".

I don't understand why this is so difficult to comprehend.

dipshit
you are so fucking pathetic
there are more liberals in the GOP than there are conservatives in the DNC

 

[rdean]

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/16/national/16proxmire.html

Generally, he was a liberal, and he was a fierce opponent of the war in Vietnam, but he never toed the party line.

In 1982, a convention of feminists booed him because he had voted against liberalizing abortion rights. Democrats were also upset when he voted to approve the conservative William H. Rehnquist as chief justice of the Supreme Court.

But he was best known for his Golden Fleece Awards, which he announced in monthly press releases to call attention to what he believed to be frivolous government spending. An award, for instance, went to the National Science Foundation in 1975 for spending $84,000 to learn why people fall in love.

Although he spent only a few hundred dollars on his campaigns, all of it out of his own pocket, Mr. Proxmire was easily re-elected five times.

Another Golden Fleece Award went to the National Institute for Mental Health, which spent $97,000 to study, among other things, what went on in a Peruvian brothel

The Federal Aviation Administration also felt Mr. Proxmire's wrath, for spending $57,800 on a study of the physical measurements of 432 airline stewardesses, paying special attention to the "length of the buttocks" and how their knees were arranged when they were seated. Other Fleece recipients were the Justice Department, for spending $27,000 to determine why prisoners wanted to get out of jail, and the Pentagon, for a $3,000 study to determine if people in the military should carry umbrellas in the rain.

From the beginning of his career in Washington, Mr. Proxmire was a loner, frequently at odds not just with Republicans but also with members of his own party.

Early in his first term, he clashed with the Senate majority leader, Lyndon B. Johnson, because he thought Johnson was compromising too much on civil rights legislation. He also did not like Johnson's support of tax breaks for the oil industry

 

[rdean]

It amazes me how you can mix in a small grain of truth and ignore the large grains. NASA's biggest enemy for years was a guy named William Proxmire, a Democrat from Wisconsin. In fact, he was so famous for dumping on science for political gain that the practice is actually named after him. Does that make Democrats anti-science, or does in make you an idiot?

My guess is both.

The Democratic Party is a coalition. Of course there are right wing loons that are part of the party. We call them "Blue Dogs".

Name two liberals in the Republican Party.

You see, the reason you can point to a single Democrat and say "They all share that point of view" is because that is your "experience". The Republican Party is 90% white and mostly Christian. They really do share a single point of view on MOST things. Democrats do not. Democratic positions are the result of a "consensus".

I don't understand why this is so difficult to comprehend.

dipshit
you are so fucking pathetic
there are more liberals in the GOP than there are conservatives in the DNC

And couldn't name two. You know nothing. Can never back up anything you say. Your posts are rarely more than a dozen words. Pathetic. That's what YOU are. Go stalk someone else creep.

 

[xsited1]

Some States Get Fat, Others Fleeced - by Nate Bailey - Budget & Tax News

"All taxpayers know that the federal government uses tax and spending policy to redistribute income from citizens with high incomes to those who make little," said study author Curtis Dubay, a Tax Foundation economist. "Citizens are less aware of geographically based income redistribution."

---------------------

We need to put to bed the "myth" that Red States are "self-sufficient". Facts prove they are merely "subsidized".

You know damn well that most of the federal money goes to minorities living in 'Red States' and yet you only seek to belittle them. What a racist you are.

 

[Dot Com]

yeah, cause what idiots like dean fail to account for is military bases, federal land holdings and other thing that cost the federal government money to the states in pure maintenance fees

I'd like to see proof of where "maintenance" off-sets the econ benefits reaped from these facilities. Can't remember the last time I heard a Congressman ask that a military base be removed from his/her district. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt though if you can produce proof.

 

[rdean]

Some States Get Fat, Others Fleeced - by Nate Bailey - Budget & Tax News

"All taxpayers know that the federal government uses tax and spending policy to redistribute income from citizens with high incomes to those who make little," said study author Curtis Dubay, a Tax Foundation economist. "Citizens are less aware of geographically based income redistribution."

---------------------

We need to put to bed the "myth" that Red States are "self-sufficient". Facts prove they are merely "subsidized".

You know damn well that most of the federal money goes to minorities living in 'Red States' and yet you only seek to belittle them. What a racist you are.

Most of the federal money goes to minorities? I'm guessing you can prove that. Besides, there are plenty of minorities living in Blue States. Seems to me, those living in Red States would do everything they could to give minorities as little as possible.

 

[mudwhistle]

Some States Get Fat, Others Fleeced - by Nate Bailey - Budget & Tax News

"All taxpayers know that the federal government uses tax and spending policy to redistribute income from citizens with high incomes to those who make little," said study author Curtis Dubay, a Tax Foundation economist. "Citizens are less aware of geographically based income redistribution."

---------------------

We need to put to bed the "myth" that Red States are "self-sufficient". Facts prove they are merely "subsidized".

Your thread title was based on several fallacies.

First of all, the study was done way back in 2005.

Secondly, many of the states that are in the top 20 are Blue states. Examples are Montana, New Mexico, Louisiana, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, and totally ignores the District of Columbia which receives more per person then any state on the list by far. Their layout per tax ratio is $5.55 compared to the highest Red state which is Mississippi at $2.02.

Thirdly, it's based on how many retirees are receiving government payouts.

The problem with this is that retirees are on a fixed income so they tend to move to states that have favorable tax-codes, thus they migrate to so-called Red States.

Blue states are often way too expensive for them to live in comfortably on their incomes. Examples are, New York, New Jersey, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Minnesota, Illinois, New Hampshire, Nevada, and Massachusetts.

Another thing you're ignoring is this study is based off of population and total incomes. Some of the top recipients per income level and total population are centered in big cities. Wages tend to be higher in most Blue states because of cost of living adjustments due to draconian tax-codes, and many of them have cities with massive population concentrations. So the numbers are a bit slanted.

This study is outdated and misleading. It's 6 years old.

Epic Fail.

 

[DiveCon]

The Democratic Party is a coalition. Of course there are right wing loons that are part of the party. We call them "Blue Dogs".

Name two liberals in the Republican Party.

You see, the reason you can point to a single Democrat and say "They all share that point of view" is because that is your "experience". The Republican Party is 90% white and mostly Christian. They really do share a single point of view on MOST things. Democrats do not. Democratic positions are the result of a "consensus".

I don't understand why this is so difficult to comprehend.

dipshit
you are so fucking pathetic
there are more liberals in the GOP than there are conservatives in the DNC

And couldn't name two. You know nothing. Can never back up anything you say. Your posts are rarely more than a dozen words. Pathetic. That's what YOU are. Go stalk someone else creep.

i could, but why bother for a fucking moronic idiot like you

 

[Trajan]

Some States Get Fat, Others Fleeced - by Nate Bailey - Budget & Tax News

"All taxpayers know that the federal government uses tax and spending policy to redistribute income from citizens with high incomes to those who make little," said study author Curtis Dubay, a Tax Foundation economist. "Citizens are less aware of geographically based income redistribution."

---------------------

We need to put to bed the "myth" that Red States are "self-sufficient". Facts prove they are merely "subsidized".

you should take a look at what a blue state and red state are/is before flying off the handle.

Any examples? Links?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Thought so.

oh no batman,thats not the way its done, you're making the claim, define the parameters, feel free to show me what a blue and red state is, how are they counted as such and the time frames under consideration, and what the money does or sppts.... mudwhistle and divecon gave you a peek. have at it.

 

[mudwhistle]

Some States Get Fat, Others Fleeced - by Nate Bailey - Budget & Tax News

"All taxpayers know that the federal government uses tax and spending policy to redistribute income from citizens with high incomes to those who make little," said study author Curtis Dubay, a Tax Foundation economist. "Citizens are less aware of geographically based income redistribution."

---------------------

We need to put to bed the "myth" that Red States are "self-sufficient". Facts prove they are merely "subsidized".

You know damn well that most of the federal money goes to minorities living in 'Red States' and yet you only seek to belittle them. What a racist you are.

Most of the federal money goes to minorities? I'm guessing you can prove that. Besides, there are plenty of minorities living in Blue States. Seems to me, those living in Red States would do everything they could to give minorities as little as possible.

Yes, those evil White Republicans.

Hate to break this to you, but the GOP believes that if you give someone a handout they have to keep coming back for more. If you give them a job, they don't need your help anymore. Democrats like it when people need them. So they simply keep them dependent on them instead of solving their problems permanently. Keep em ignorant, and keep em scared of losing their benefits, and thus you keep em voting for you.

Personally I think we need a law that makes it illegal to use the Treasury to buy votes. Also, we need a law that states if you go on welfare you become a ward of the state and you lose the right to vote. That would really piss the Dems off, because it would spoil their fun.