Cuomo calls out McConnell on Kentucky's federal freeloading

[Hutch Starskey]

But you love wealth redistribution, so what's the problem?

Do I?

Yes, you do, so you really have nobody but yourself to blame. You're the one who elects these politicians who want more centralized control in D.C. so they can divvy up slices of the pie based on who lobbies them the most or which Congressman has the most seniority. Then you come here and bellyache about "taker states." As I said initially, maybe the moral of the story here is that bigger, centralized government isn't the answer. Would California and New York be better off if most of their tax dollars never left their states in the first place so they can spend their own money on themselves instead of having to beg for it back?

The concept of a taker state does not require whatever the **** all ^ that was.

The takers are the ones who contribute little to your pie yet recieve a very large slice.

Exactly, so why do you keep voting for it and then come back here bitching about the consequences of your vote?

I don't live in a taker state. I have no supporting vote. My elected officials don't play those games.

 

[g5000]

Kentucky receives 148 billion more fed money than they put in.
New York puts in $116 billion more than they receive.
Yet Mitch McConnell of Kentucky wants no more federal aide for New York.

Andrew Cuomo (April 23, 2020): Let’s talk about fairness, Mitch. NYS puts $116 billion more into the federal pot than we take out. Kentucky TAKES $148 billion more from the federal pot than they put in. But we don't deserve help now because the 15,000 people who died here were predominately democrats?

Kentucky has TWO huge Army bases. NY has ?

West Point, retard.

Fort Drum.

Fort Hamilton.

Watervliet Arsenal.

Any more stupid questions?

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

I don't live in a taker state. I have no supporting vote. My elected officials don't play those games.

They absolutely do. I guarantee both of your Senators and your Congressman are voting for every bloated pork filled budget, every omnibus bill, social program funding bill. etc. that they use with the tax dollars funneled in to D.C. by your state that ultimately go back out the door to Kentucky, Mississippi, Alabama, etc. etc.

Yes, you are responsible for it, so until you choose to start voting for people who are willing to put a stop to that stop crying about it ya baby. I've said for a long time that there is a massive disconnect among the American people regarding what they think they are voting for and what they are actually voting for and you're textbook example of that.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Lets cut to the chase, you lied. Or you are ignorant. Its one of the two.

Obviously It is you who is ignorant as I very clearly showed.

 

[bripat9643]

But you love wealth redistribution, so what's the problem?

Do I?

Yes, you do, so you really have nobody but yourself to blame. You're the one who elects these politicians who want more centralized control in D.C. so they can divvy up slices of the pie based on who lobbies them the most or which Congressman has the most seniority. Then you come here and bellyache about "taker states." As I said initially, maybe the moral of the story here is that bigger, centralized government isn't the answer. Would California and New York be better off if most of their tax dollars never left their states in the first place so they can spend their own money on themselves instead of having to beg for it back?

The concept of a taker state does not require whatever the **** all ^ that was.

The takers are the ones who contribute little to your pie yet recieve a very large slice.

Exactly, so why do you keep voting for it and then come back here bitching about the consequences of your vote?

I don't live in a taker state. I have no supporting vote. My elected officials don't play those games.

Your concept of a "taker state" is utter horseshit. It's your attempt to muddy the waters about welfare. All states are "taker states." They all take from those who produce and give to those who don't.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

They are still freeloaders, moron.

Yes. Kentucky is.

So here is a little bit of fact.

The War on Poverty has cost $22 trillion -- three times more than what the government has spent on all wars in American history. Federal and state governments spend $1 trillion in taxpayer dollars on America's 80 means-tested welfare programs annually.
The War on Poverty Has Cost $22 Trillion - NCPA
ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?article_id=25288


The national deficit is 22 trillion...Do you see a correlation? This war the LBJ started can never be won, so lets abolish this war, stop paying people to sit on their lazy liberal asses, put the people to work, and soon there is no debt, because the holes in the United States have now been put to work, thus more taxes to pay down the debt and no free money for those not willing to work, along with the government agency that is no longer needed....

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

But you love wealth redistribution, so what's the problem?

Do I?

Yes, you do, so you really have nobody but yourself to blame. You're the one who elects these politicians who want more centralized control in D.C. so they can divvy up slices of the pie based on who lobbies them the most or which Congressman has the most seniority. Then you come here and bellyache about "taker states." As I said initially, maybe the moral of the story here is that bigger, centralized government isn't the answer. Would California and New York be better off if most of their tax dollars never left their states in the first place so they can spend their own money on themselves instead of having to beg for it back?

This is a fact that so many who make the "taker state" argument fail to grasp.

But, then, the SALT tax exclusion had these fuckers screaming like stuck pigs.

So, really, what was happening was these "donor" states were getting all sorts of exemptions for their state income taxes and other local taxes and paying less in Fed income tax. When they were forced to pay the local taxes (California) AND not take the exclusion on the Fed income taxes, it became clear that these "donor" states were nothing more than areas with a higher cost of living which required higher incomes resulting in more tax revenue. It became obvious that a lowly unskilled worker had to make $100,000 a year just to afford basic living expenses.

FUNNY AS HELL to watch. It exposed the **** out of these "donor" states.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

I don't live in a taker state. I have no supporting vote. My elected officials don't play those games.

They absolutely do. I guarantee both of your Senators and your Congressman are voting for every bloated pork filled budget, every omnibus bill, social program funding bill. etc. that they use with the tax dollars funneled in to D.C. by your state that ultimately go back out the door to Kentucky, Mississippi, Alabama, etc. etc.

Yes, you are responsible for it, so until you choose to start voting for people who are willing to put a stop to that stop crying about it ya baby. I've said for a long time that there is a massive disconnect among the American people regarding what they think they are voting for and what they are actually voting for and you're textbook example of that.

That in no way makes me or them responsible for the mismanaged, taker states. I actually agree with Mcconnell. We should let these failed states like Kentucky go bankrupt.

 

[BluesLegend]

Lets cut to the chase, you lied. Or you are ignorant. Its one of the two.

Obviously It is you who is ignorant as I very clearly showed.

You showed nothing but your ignorance. California received nearly half a TRILLION dollars in Federal spending, more than they paid in according to USA Today. Tissue? You're just mad because to destroyed your ignorant liberal talking point.

We haven't even gotten to what California spends all that money on. The fraction of Federal spending Kentucky receives, over 60% is spent on Medicaid and Education. You know poor people Dems claim they care about. What does California spend their Federal dollars on, stupid climate change shit?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

They are still freeloaders, moron.

Yes. Kentucky is.

So here is a little bit of fact.

The War on Poverty has cost $22 trillion -- three times more than what the government has spent on all wars in American history. Federal and state governments spend $1 trillion in taxpayer dollars on America's 80 means-tested welfare programs annually.
The War on Poverty Has Cost $22 Trillion - NCPA
ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?article_id=25288


The national deficit is 22 trillion...Do you see a correlation? This war the LBJ started can never be won, so lets abolish this war, stop paying people to sit on their lazy liberal asses, put the people to work, and soon there is no debt, because the holes in the United States have now been put to work, thus more taxes to pay down the debt and no free money for those not willing to work, along with the government agency that is no longer needed....

Irrelevant nonsense.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

I don't live in a taker state. I have no supporting vote. My elected officials don't play those games.

They absolutely do. I guarantee both of your Senators and your Congressman are voting for every bloated pork filled budget, every omnibus bill, social program funding bill. etc. that they use with the tax dollars funneled in to D.C. by your state that ultimately go back out the door to Kentucky, Mississippi, Alabama, etc. etc.

Yes, you are responsible for it, so until you choose to start voting for people who are willing to put a stop to that stop crying about it ya baby. I've said for a long time that there is a massive disconnect among the American people regarding what they think they are voting for and what they are actually voting for and you're textbook example of that.

That in no way makes me or them responsible for the mismanaged, taker states. I actually agree with Mcconnell. We should let these failed states like Kentucky go bankrupt.

I will bet dollars to donuts that California would go bankrupt LONG before Kentucky.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Lets cut to the chase, you lied. Or you are ignorant. Its one of the two.

Obviously It is you who is ignorant as I very clearly showed.

You showed nothing but your ignorance. California received nearly half a TRILLION dollars in Federal spending, more than they paid in according to USA Today. Tissue? You're just mad because to destroyed your ignorant liberal talking point.

We haven't even gotten to what California spends all that money on. The fraction of Federal spending Kentucky receives, over 60% is spent on Medicaid and Education. You know poor people Dems claim they care about. What does California spend their Federal dollars on, stupid climate change shit?

And.....for the fourteenth time, this is not about the amount of federal money the states receive but what they pay into the federal pot. Also my link blew yours away.

 

[Flash]

View attachment 327332

Or what it is, disaster relief.
There is a declared federal emergency, dope.

You are really confused, aren't you Moon Bat?

Why in the hell should my tax money be used to bail out the big spenders and high taxers in fiscally irresponsible Democrat controlled shitholes like NYC?

NYC is a ******* corrupt welfare state and sanctuary city that pays filthy ass union school janitors $150K a year. Piss on them. After they cut off the illegals from welfare then we will consider if I have to work to give money to them.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

That in no way makes me or them responsible for the mismanaged, taker states.

It absolutely does because it's your elected reps who are allowing them to be dependent on the money being redistributed from your state to theirs.

Honestly, a third grader can understand this. Maybe that's why you're having problems grasping it.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

I will bet dollars to donuts that California would go bankrupt LONG before Kentucky.

LOL...
Kentucky's already broke.

 

[BluesLegend]

Lets cut to the chase, you lied. Or you are ignorant. Its one of the two.

Obviously It is you who is ignorant as I very clearly showed.

You showed nothing but your ignorance. California received nearly half a TRILLION dollars in Federal spending, more than they paid in according to USA Today. Tissue? You're just mad because to destroyed your ignorant liberal talking point.

We haven't even gotten to what California spends all that money on. The fraction of Federal spending Kentucky receives, over 60% is spent on Medicaid and Education. You know poor people Dems claim they care about. What does California spend their Federal dollars on, stupid climate change shit?

And.....for the fourteenth time, this is not about the amount of federal money the states receive but what they pay into the federal pot. Also my link blew yours away.

Of course not, because you can't SPIN and LIE about actual facts. You are fake news I'm done with you.

 

[Nostra]

But you love wealth redistribution, so what's the problem?

Do I?

Yes, you do, so you really have nobody but yourself to blame. You're the one who elects these politicians who want more centralized control in D.C. so they can divvy up slices of the pie based on who lobbies them the most or which Congressman has the most seniority. Then you come here and bellyache about "taker states." As I said initially, maybe the moral of the story here is that bigger, centralized government isn't the answer. Would California and New York be better off if most of their tax dollars never left their states in the first place so they can spend their own money on themselves instead of having to beg for it back?

The concept of a taker state does not require whatever the **** all ^ that was.

The takers are the ones who contribute little to your pie yet recieve a very large slice.

Exactly, so why do you keep voting for it and then come back here bitching about the consequences of your vote?

I don't live in a taker state. I have no supporting vote. My elected officials don't play those games.

It;s for the greater good.

It takes a village.

From each according to their ability, to each according to their needs.

It's only fair.

Just to quote Dimsocialists complaining about the "rich" not paying their "fair share".

 

[Nostra]

Kentucky receives 148 billion more fed money than they put in.
New York puts in $116 billion more than they receive.
Yet Mitch McConnell of Kentucky wants no more federal aide for New York.

Andrew Cuomo (April 23, 2020): Let’s talk about fairness, Mitch. NYS puts $116 billion more into the federal pot than we take out. Kentucky TAKES $148 billion more from the federal pot than they put in. But we don't deserve help now because the 15,000 people who died here were predominately democrats?

New York needs to pay their "fair share" and stop complaining.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

But you love wealth redistribution, so what's the problem?

Do I?

Yes, you do, so you really have nobody but yourself to blame. You're the one who elects these politicians who want more centralized control in D.C. so they can divvy up slices of the pie based on who lobbies them the most or which Congressman has the most seniority. Then you come here and bellyache about "taker states." As I said initially, maybe the moral of the story here is that bigger, centralized government isn't the answer. Would California and New York be better off if most of their tax dollars never left their states in the first place so they can spend their own money on themselves instead of having to beg for it back?

This is a fact that so many who make the "taker state" argument fail to grasp.

But, then, the SALT tax exclusion had these fuckers screaming like stuck pigs.

So, really, what was happening was these "donor" states were getting all sorts of exemptions for their state income taxes and other local taxes and paying less in Fed income tax. When they were forced to pay the local taxes (California) AND not take the exclusion on the Fed income taxes, it became clear that these "donor" states were nothing more than areas with a higher cost of living which required higher incomes resulting in more tax revenue. It became obvious that a lowly unskilled workerOP had to make $100,000 a year just to afford basic living expenses.

FUNNY AS HELL to watch. It exposed the **** out of these "donor" states.

Yes, dope. With the resulting increased state tax revenues, the higher taxed states require less from the federal govt. A successful state economy.

 

[bripat9643]

I will bet dollars to donuts that California would go bankrupt LONG before Kentucky.

LOL...
Kentucky's already broke.

California isn't? It's 1000 times more broke than Kentucky.