How does your question correlate?
I think his point was more about how you have the sides all intertwined for some reason. I'd start to believe the top one was right wing, and the bottom left wing, but about half your talk is about handouts. And the #1 recipient of welfare are blue collar white Americans. And the most heavily dependent states on Federal welfare are red, while the least are mostly blue.
So I guess I'm kinda confused. You've come up with a false definition to begin with there.
I guess for me, I'd rather not let politicians decide for me what I believe in. I'd rather not just stick with an idea because someone with an R behind their name tells me I should. I lean right on most topics. But have no problem accepting facts as evidence from either side. I don't think picking a side and dividing the US is good for this country either. I think coming together as a country does so much more for us.
But that's just me.
Today's your lucky day...I aim to enlighten the confused, uninformed and self manipulated. You're welcome in advance.
21.3% of US Participates in Government Assistance Programs Each Month
Who Participated in Welfare?
The black population: At 41.6 percent, blacks were more likely to participate in government assistance programs in an average month.
The black participation rate was followed by Hispanics at 36.4 percent, Asians or Pacific Islanders at 17.8 percent, and non-Hispanic whites at 13.2 percent.
Help me here....Are Blacks and Hispanics Republicans in "Red States"?
California - 12% of the nations population, 33% of the nations welfare recipients.
Note that Hawaii and New York are fighting CA for that number one spot....also note all three are blue states. Here you go:
It Looks Like Red States Take Most in Federal 'Welfare' from this Map. But Looks Can Be Deceiving.
California’s Welfare Benefits: Boom or Bust?
"There has been much discussion about immigrants in the United States from everywhere around the world. Yet, why is it that California seems to attract the most immigrants of any state? Indeed, while the state is only
12% of the nation’s population, it is home to 33% of welfare residents.
According to a report published by the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) on January 26, 2015, there is a correlation between generous welfare benefits and an increase in immigration.
In total, California outspends every other state in public welfare spending – in 2014, it spent $22.4 billion. In contrast, the next closest state, New York, spent $11.9 billion. That being said, does this make California a magnet for immigrants? Not necessarily. It is more of an anchor – a reason why residents stay for long periods of time in the state. However, to deny that there is no magnet would be incorrect. According to George J. Borjas, the Robert W. Scrivner Professor of Economics and Social Policy at the Harvard Kennedy School and the author of the aforementioned report, the reason as to why people decide to relocate is due to “
income-maximizing behavior.” Immigrants have already accepted that there are certain fixed costs that are inevitable because of migration, so it is natural that they will flock towards the places with the highest benefits. Empirical evidence suggests that it is because of these differences that there are an increasingly disproportionate number of immigrants among states. While there is the possibility of alternative explanations for this phenomenon, the conclusion that Borjas draws using the wealth-maximization hypothesis is one such testable method.
However, upon closer examination, on a per-capita basis, California’s
seemingly generous benefits pale in data comparison to other states. For example, it spends approximately $179 for every resident, behind $233 in Hawaii and $256 in New York. Furthermore, approximately 8.9% of California residents live in poverty, the highest of any state.
What else can I teach you?
