Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
It hasn't been "debunked" at all. Red states receive the vast majority of federal subsidies and benefits, because no one wants to live in those states.
thefederalist.com
It hasn't been "debunked" at all. Red states receive the vast majority of federal subsidies and benefits, because no one wants to live in those states.
Debunked.
Against a national average of $1,935 in intergovernmental spending per American, red states receive just $1,879. Blue states get considerably more, at $2,124 per resident.
Are Red States Tax Takers And Blue States Tax Makers?
Against a national average of $1,935 in intergovernmental spending per American, red states receive just $1,879. Blue states get considerably more.
If Chicago did not exist, wouldn't Illinois be better off? Detroit is killing Michigan. To think the poorly run cities are anything but a drain on their states is laughable.
The populated blue states already subsidize the unpopulated red states.
States like Mississippi and Alabama will become even more worthless if states like California and New York no longer support them and keep them afloat.
The populated blue states already subsidize the unpopulated red states.
States like Mississippi and Alabama will become even more worthless if states like California and New York no longer support them and keep them afloat.
From Ballotpedia
Mississippi 34th per state in budget deficit.
Alabama 28th per state in budget deficit
California 1st per state in budget deficit. $ 152 BILLION deficit and growing.
New York 2nd per state in budget deficit. $131 BILLION deficit and growing.
California and New York have massive state budget deficits!
You that ignorant?
It hasn't been "debunked" at all. Red states receive the vast majority of federal subsidies and benefits, because no one wants to live in those states.
Oh look, A Nazi spewing a lie that was debunked 30 years ago.
No Herr Himmler, military bases in Alabama are in fact NOT "welfare" to "red" states.
Yellowstone park is not welfare either.
You know what IS welfare? SALT - when President Trump cut off the Welfare to greedy fucks in New York and California, y'all Nazis melted the fuck down.
"What do you mean state taxes can't be deducted? How will Idaho pay for gender reassignment in California? NO FAIR!!!"
SALT is not welfare. It wasw a way to raise taxes on red states so more money could be shipped to blue states. Idaho soes not pay for anything in California. Even Mark Levin has debunked that argument.
How will you achieve that?The populated blue states already subsidize the unpopulated red states.
States like Mississippi and Alabama will become even more worthless if states like California and New York no longer support them and keep them afloat.
Please don't post thread titles in ALL CAPS. You've been here forever and should know better by now.
Sorry, Didn't realize it.... when I posted....
Meanwhile, Plantation Sanctuary Blue States suck those within dry with higher taxes, lower services, decaying infrastructure, less safety and higher crime rates.
The populated blue states already subsidize the unpopulated red states.
States like Mississippi and Alabama will become even more worthless if states like California and New York no longer support them and keep them afloat.
It hasn't been "debunked" at all. Red states receive the vast majority of federal subsidies and benefits, because no one wants to live in those states.
Debunked.
Against a national average of $1,935 in intergovernmental spending per American, red states receive just $1,879. Blue states get considerably more, at $2,124 per resident.
Are Red States Tax Takers And Blue States Tax Makers?
Against a national average of $1,935 in intergovernmental spending per American, red states receive just $1,879. Blue states get considerably more.
From YOUR ARTICLE:
Democrats are correct on this fact. The blue states did pay more per capita in federal taxes than the red did. The $12,648 per capita taxation there is 118 percent of the national average. The purple states fell in between the two, slightly below the national average.
Since blue state residents pay more taxes per capita, they should get more back. Duh.
And you Republicans are the ones who supposedly hate taxes so much, remember? Therefore, your red states should be taking a lot less from the Federal government. Talk about hypocritcal.
The populated blue states already subsidize the unpopulated red states.
States like Mississippi and Alabama will become even more worthless if states like California and New York no longer support them and keep them afloat.
From Ballotpedia
Mississippi 34th per state in budget deficit.
Alabama 28th per state in budget deficit
California 1st per state in budget deficit. $ 152 BILLION deficit and growing.
New York 2nd per state in budget deficit. $131 BILLION deficit and growing.
California and New York have massive state budget deficits!
You that ignorant?
Totally different issue, but you're not smart enough to understand that.
Yeah, MI and AL have smaller budget deficits. No one wants to live there, so they don't spend nearly as much money as CA and NY on government services. That's just common sense.
We can form several nations !!
Even give blacks their own nation
Maybe a second Jewish nation in parts of NY
It’s endless
California ithe QUEEN of the welfare states hun..no one receives more welfare than they.The populated blue states already subsidize the unpopulated red states.
States like Mississippi and Alabama will become even more worthless if states like California and New York no longer support them and keep them afloat.
Lie. That has been debunked. As an example, they count Social Security benefits in Florida as subsidization. BS. Plus military bases, which of course are of national import.
BTW NY has been losing population for at least 6 decades and CA is now suffering the same fate. But I love how you crap all over the citizens of MS and Al, typical douche lefty that you are.
It hasn't been "debunked" at all. Red states receive the vast majority of federal subsidies and benefits, because no one wants to live in those states.
A balanced view must acknowledge that urban centers are the engines of finance and commerce, largely responsible for the nation's wealth, and evidencing it conspicuously.A DIFFERENT TYPE OF SECESSION IS ALREADY HAPPENING IN USA
A DIFFERENT TYPE OF SECESSION IS ALREADY HAPPENING IN USA
A DIFFERENT TYPE OF SECESSION IS ALREADY HAPPENING IN USA, The secession of 1860 will not happen again, but a different kind is already taking placecanadafreepress.com
By Jeff Crouere
The secession of 1860 will not happen again, but a different kind is already taking place
Lately there has been so much frustration with the last election and the direction of our country that some Trump supporters have been talking about “secession.” Many conservatives and libertarians are asking if it makes sense for certain states to leave the union the way South Carolina left in 1860, after the election of Abraham Lincoln as President of the United States.
Whether it makes “sense” or not, we can be assured that it will not happen. Although the South Carolina state legislature voted in November of 1860 to initiate the process of secession, no state legislature would do that today. This is because most modern state legislatures, even conservative ones, do not have many members who are angry enough at the federal government to support seceding from it.
Americans who live in rural and some suburban areas are executing a secession of their own
Who can forget what happened to Mark and Patricia McCloskey in St. Louis?
Urban areas have been failing Financialally for years
In large cities, politicians spend vast sums of money on enormous municipal government systems which include inefficient departments featuring payrolls that are too large and are too expensive. Other characteristics include broken infrastructure, rampant homelessness, and an overly generous municipal pension system.
How much longer will productive taxpayers living in rural and suburban communities agree to subsidize large cities? Sooner or later, these citizens will say “Enough is enough, we want out!” They will want the urban centers to form their own “United Cities of America,” with their own laws and lifestyles. Simultaneously, Americans living in non-urban areas will want to forge closer bonds of their own as similarities are recognized even more.
The secession of 1860 will not happen again, but a different kind is already taking place.
Comment:
We have seen this happening daily in the Blue Plantation Sanctuary cities and their surronding areas like New York, Chicago, Baltimore, Minneapolis, St, Louis, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Seattle and Portland, while the people in rural and suburban areas pay the taxes to the state and get little in the way of safety and support from the City and State.
California ithe QUEEN of the welfare states hun..no one receives more welfare than they.
Secondly, FEDERAL spending for states when the libs get involve is a play with numbers game---they include the spending for the MILITARY bases which tend to be in the warmer southern states but aren't what people would expect in the statistics.
www.governing.com
The populated blue states already subsidize the unpopulated red states.
States like Mississippi and Alabama will become even more worthless if states like California and New York no longer support them and keep them afloat.
SALT is not welfare. It wasw a way to raise taxes on red states so more money could be shipped to blue states. Idaho soes not pay for anything in California. Even Mark Levin has debunked that argument.
I believe you are confused. Yes, cities generate a lot of money, but Chicago for instance is so poorly run that they are deep in debt. Small town folks get to enjoy all that wonderful debt too. I'm not disagreeing on the money generated by say, Chicago, but if that poorly run city did not exist, people in the countryside would not be paying for its incompetence. Take a state like Iowa, they don't generate near the money, but they don't need too. They don't have any money pits they have to support. I have nothing against cities, but please don't tell me they are propping anybody up. You might want to work on your contempt for small town people, that is not attractive.If Chicago did not exist, wouldn't Illinois be better off? Detroit is killing Michigan. To think the poorly run cities are anything but a drain on their states is laughable.
Yes, all of those jobs in Hicksville, IL and Bumblefuck, MI will generate enough tax revenue for IL and MI.
Holy Shit.
Premise is totally backwards. High density population in cities generates more taxes than rural communities. Cities are also where the tax paying businesses are and where wealthy folks choose to live.A DIFFERENT TYPE OF SECESSION IS ALREADY HAPPENING IN USA
A DIFFERENT TYPE OF SECESSION IS ALREADY HAPPENING IN USA
A DIFFERENT TYPE OF SECESSION IS ALREADY HAPPENING IN USA, The secession of 1860 will not happen again, but a different kind is already taking place
By Jeff Crouere
The secession of 1860 will not happen again, but a different kind is already taking place
Lately there has been so much frustration with the last election and the direction of our country that some Trump supporters have been talking about “secession.” Many conservatives and libertarians are asking if it makes sense for certain states to leave the union the way South Carolina left in 1860, after the election of Abraham Lincoln as President of the United States.
Whether it makes “sense” or not, we can be assured that it will not happen. Although the South Carolina state legislature voted in November of 1860 to initiate the process of secession, no state legislature would do that today. This is because most modern state legislatures, even conservative ones, do not have many members who are angry enough at the federal government to support seceding from it.
Americans who live in rural and some suburban areas are executing a secession of their own
Who can forget what happened to Mark and Patricia McCloskey in St. Louis?
Urban areas have been failing Financialally for years
In large cities, politicians spend vast sums of money on enormous municipal government systems which include inefficient departments featuring payrolls that are too large and are too expensive. Other characteristics include broken infrastructure, rampant homelessness, and an overly generous municipal pension system.
How much longer will productive taxpayers living in rural and suburban communities agree to subsidize large cities? Sooner or later, these citizens will say “Enough is enough, we want out!” They will want the urban centers to form their own “United Cities of America,” with their own laws and lifestyles. Simultaneously, Americans living in non-urban areas will want to forge closer bonds of their own as similarities are recognized even more.
The secession of 1860 will not happen again, but a different kind is already taking place.
Comment:
We have seen this happening daily in the Blue Plantation Sanctuary cities and their surronding areas like New York, Chicago, Baltimore, Minneapolis, St, Louis, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Seattle and Portland, while the people in rural and suburban areas pay the taxes to the state and get little in the way of safety and support from the City and State.
