(Prepare: this is a long post. Feel free to move along if that sort of thing offends you. I also did the best I could with the images, but I'm no guru)
I see the same graphs over and over that seem to indicate that "red" states receive WAY more than they contribute to the Federal government. So today I went to a couple of different sources to get 2012 data. The result? Some do, some don't, but it's not as clear-cut as is often portrayed by the Kos crowd.
First off, I eliminated defense spending from the totals. My premise here is that the entire nation benefits from defense, regardless of where the bases are located. But if you have a beef with that modification, the numbers didn't change all that much really, and "blue" state Virginia had the biggest drop down the list when I excluded it. So feel free to play with the data yourself: Revenue from IRS Spending from Census Bureau
One of the first things I noticed was that even when defense spending was excluded completely, we still spent $1.06 for every dollar collected last year. Unsustainable. Anyway, I digress. Here is a view of the Non-Defense ratio color-coded by the 2012 Presidential election results. Pretty even mix:
The “Takers” (more or less):
The “Givers” (more or less):
Delaware has to be that low due to all the corporate taxes collected, huh? Only thing I can think of since they fare much worse in the per-capita ranks (though still not bad). But what's up with Minnesota?
Finally, someone was curious in another thread about the per-capita spend, and that was on the Census link above, so here it is:
Ok, since Federal salaries are included, I think D.C. can be eliminated as an anomaly (though it still easily ranks #1 at $37,817 if you exclude it). But I can’t tell if defense salaries are in that figure, so I didn’t go there...
Not so clear cut, is it?