Skip to main content

View Diary: Blue States to the Rescue. Again. (54 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  An expected result from progressive income tax. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Lujane, kurt, sydneyluv

    Not so much a transfer from blue to red states as a transfer from the rich (wherever they happen to live) to lower income people (wherever they happen to live) and others who get a disproportionate share of Federal programs.

    The state governments do not ship money to the federal for distribution to other states.

    There is no burden for the average blue state resident that taxes from their wealthy neighbors go to help people in need from other states.

    The most important way to protect the environment is not to have more than one child.

    by nextstep on Mon Oct 10, 2011 at 04:49:18 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Sure there is (8+ / 0-)
      There is no burden for the average blue state resident that taxes from their wealthy neighbors go to help people in need from other states.

      Imagine that the overall tax burden was the same and it all stayed in state (i.e., the average person didn't send any $$ to the feds).  Clearly this person's state would benefit at the expense of a red state.  So, I would consider that "lost" services, perks, whatever that the average blue stater doesn't get to be a "burden"

      •  Blue State Balance Budget Bill (14+ / 0-)

        California from 2000 to 2005 paid in $292B more than they recieved from the Federal government.  I can guarantee that if California had $292B more right now they would be better off.  

        The next time some Red State Senator talks about "fiscal responsibility" or "balanced budget", I would love for Blue State Senators to introduce a "Blue State Balance Budget Act" that specifies that for every dollar a state sends into the Federal government, the state gets back an equal amount in Federal dollars.  Time to let the Red States (being run by Republicans btw!) pull themselves up by their bootstraps and stop relying on daddy Blue State to support their "right to work" arses.

        Poor man wants to be rich. Rich man wants to king. And the king ain't satisifed until he rules everything. B.Springsteen

        by howd on Tue Oct 11, 2011 at 08:50:08 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  To nitpick, if you read the fine print (5+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          howd, tardis10, ColoTim, NoMoreLies, terabytes

          at the bottom of the charts at your link, that $292 billion is fudged based on the federal government running a balanced budget (which it probably only did one of those years!).

          So, California didn't really send in $292 billion more than it got back - for example, if the ratio the current 0.78 and the federal budget deficit is huge (to make it easy, lets say the government is spending 2x what it takes in) - then California is actually getting $1.56 for every $1 it sends the other way.

          Of course, the "red" states make out oh so much better than the figures show in this scenario - for example, one with a current ratio of 1.5 in the charts would be taking in $3 for every $1 sent the other way.  

          The points being (i) that the blue states are absolutely getting fucked over but (ii) it does not necessary follow that California actually sent in $292 billion more than they got back.

          •  Thanks For Pointing that Out (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Roadbed Guy, tardis10, ColoTim

            Good point.  Didn't read the fine print (Damn we need that consumer protection agency, eh?).  But as you said the Red States are still huge Welfare States and that really is the point.  

            What I don't understand is why the Democrats don't point out every chance they get, the fact that the Red States, being run almost exclusively by Republicans for years and years, are doing so poorly in health care, education, jobs, etc.   As someone else said, if states were run like a business, the Red States would have got fired a long time ago.

            Poor man wants to be rich. Rich man wants to king. And the king ain't satisifed until he rules everything. B.Springsteen

            by howd on Tue Oct 11, 2011 at 09:42:21 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Yes, that seems to be some awfully low (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              howd

              hanging fruit for the Dems to use.

              And maybe link it to the data shown on the map at this link that shows that life expectancy is actually decreasing in hundreds of counties in the USA.  

              IIRC, this is really the first time ever (outside of war) that life expentancy has FALLEN in a first world industrialized country (I don't think Russia counts in those respects).  It is absolutely damning.

              I've been wanting to overlay that map with the county map showing red/blue voting trends but have yet to do so (the prediction, of course, is the red areas on both maps will overlap significantly - for those who don't click onthat link, red on the life expentancy map shows counties where a decrease has occurred . . .. . but I'm sure the use of that particular color was just a coincidence!)

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (129)
  • Community (64)
  • Elections (24)
  • Media (23)
  • Environment (23)
  • Civil Rights (22)
  • Culture (22)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (21)
  • Science (21)
  • Law (21)
  • Josh Duggar (20)
  • Labor (18)
  • Economy (17)
  • Bernie Sanders (16)
  • Ireland (16)
  • Marriage Equality (16)
  • 2016 (15)
  • Hillary Clinton (15)
  • Climate Change (15)
  • Rescued (15)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site