- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Daily Beast acticle on Red-State Socialism
Posted on 6/27/14 at 8:36 am
Posted on 6/27/14 at 8:36 am
On the heels of the Mississippi runoff, The Daily Beast did this piece: After Cochran’s Win: Red-State Socialism Must Be Stopped!
The article is OK but there are some mind blowing statistics.
Delaware is bending over backwards and forwards for America.
--edited - article from Daily Beast not Politico
The article is OK but there are some mind blowing statistics.
quote:
In 2005, Mississippi received a jaw-dropping $2.02 in federal money for every $1 of taxes its residents sent to Washington.
quote:
By 2010, that had jacked up further still to $2.47. That same year, the Tax Foundation calculates that fully 49 percent of Mississippi’s state general revenue comes from federal taxpayers who will never step foot in Morgan Freeman’s and William Faulkner’s beloved stamping grounds.
quote:
Besides Mississippi, other notable red-state freeloaders included Alabama ($2.03), Alaska ($1.93), and South Carolina ($1.92). “Republican states, on average, received $1.46 in federal spending for every tax dollar paid,” writes Dave Gilson. “Democratic states, on average, received $1.16.” Shame on both sides for bilking the system—and props to places as generous and different as Delaware (which received just 38 cents per dollar paid), New York (72 cents), California (87 cents) Texas (85 cents), and Massachusetts (83 cents).
Delaware is bending over backwards and forwards for America.
--edited - article from Daily Beast not Politico
This post was edited on 6/27/14 at 8:38 am
7
Posted on 6/27/14 at 8:38 am to a want
a. this is exactly why cochran almost lost. this is a big "no shite" that was agreed by the majority of conservative voters in the election this week (and why thad had to get liberals to vote for him)
b. i'm sure the people in power in MS would gladly give the population of MS that skews this spending to states like Delaware
b. i'm sure the people in power in MS would gladly give the population of MS that skews this spending to states like Delaware
Posted on 6/27/14 at 8:52 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
a. this is exactly why cochran almost lost. this is a big "no shite" that was agreed by the majority of conservative voters in the election this week (and why thad had to get liberals to vote for him) b. i'm sure the people in power in MS would gladly give the population of MS that skews this spending to states like Delaware
Well, pretty much nukes this one.
Posted on 6/27/14 at 8:53 am to SlowFlowPro
Did McDaniel offer-up specifics on how he would cut spending in Mississippi? Because I don't think that's why Mississippi voters voted for him.
Maybe he's for overall cuts, but not for taking away any of that sweet, sweet bacon. McDaniel still wants to receive $2/1 in federal dollars/taxes regardless of the amount.
Maybe he's for overall cuts, but not for taking away any of that sweet, sweet bacon. McDaniel still wants to receive $2/1 in federal dollars/taxes regardless of the amount.
Posted on 6/27/14 at 8:54 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
a. this is exactly why cochran almost lost. this is a big "no shite" that was agreed by the majority of conservative voters in the election this week (and why thad had to get liberals to vote for him)
b. i'm sure the people in power in MS would gladly give the population of MS that skews this spending to states like Delaware
No more posts needed.
Posted on 6/27/14 at 8:54 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Besides Mississippi, other notable red-state freeloaders included Alabama ($2.03), Alaska ($1.93), and South Carolina ($1.92).
You can't call Alaska a freeloader state... the reason its ratio is so high is because the population is so low and there is so much federal land that needs to be managed.
On the flip side the other driver of federal spending in these studies is welfare recipients vs. large businesses. Since Alabama/Mississippi have a lot of minorities that syphon welfare and other federal entitlements, and not a lot of large corporations to pay out taxes like California/New York/Texas have.
Posted on 6/27/14 at 8:56 am to a want
quote:
Maybe he's for overall cuts, but not for taking away any of that sweet, sweet bacon. McDaniel still wants to receive $2/1 in federal dollars/taxes regardless of the amount.
It will happen regardless of what McDaniel does. The number is skewed due to the high minority/poor population that drains welfare/entitelements from the federal government. Unless he voted to cut or eliminate these programs it's not going to change.
Posted on 6/27/14 at 8:56 am to a want
Isn't interesting how we continue to do what is failing?
Mississippi (and much of Louisiana) has been leeching off the federal budget since FDR yet it is still at the bottom of everything economically and socially.
Mississippi (and much of Louisiana) has been leeching off the federal budget since FDR yet it is still at the bottom of everything economically and socially.
Posted on 6/27/14 at 9:03 am to goldennugget
quote:
The number is skewed due to the high minority/poor population that drains welfare/entitelements from the federal government
Yeah, some is welfare type stuff, but a lot is building highways, bridges, military bases or other "public good" projects that employ a bunch of people but may not really be needed. Those types of projects are a bigger piece of the pie compared to welfare
Posted on 6/27/14 at 9:14 am to I B Freeman
quote:
Mississippi (and much of Louisiana) has been leeching off the federal budget since FDR yet it is still at the bottom of everything economically and socially.
maybe you should look at a demographics map overlayed on top of federal social spending....
let me know when you have your "ah ha" moment.
Posted on 6/27/14 at 9:14 am to a want
quote:
Yeah, some is welfare type stuff, but a lot is building highways, bridges, military bases or other "public good" projects that employ a bunch of people but may not really be needed. Those types of projects are a bigger piece of the pie compared to welfare
You think they spend more on roads than Medicaid in Mississippi?
Mississippi $4,465,933,337
Thats a whole hell of a lot of roads
Posted on 6/27/14 at 9:24 am to a want
quote:
Yeah, some is welfare type stuff, but a lot is building highways, bridges, military bases or other "public good" projects that employ a bunch of people but may not really be needed. Those types of projects are a bigger piece of the pie compared to welfare
Probably substantial farming subsidies in there too, Want. Health too.
I just wonder if the books are open to the public, in regard to all the spending. Precise and specific details should readily be available; if it ain't...there's the problem. And the solution.
In all honesty, it's true that the Government (QE based) has become a major source of direct and indirect jobs, as well as outright subsidizer for unemployed/unemployable folk. Especially in States with minority populations, but not very vibrant economic manufacturing base. Cochran did his job, brought home the bacon, as he was elected to do.
The answer to this whole - very dangerous - economic scenario...is a HEALTHY ECONOMY. It will be based on cheap and dependable energy; of the which we will be one of the few sources in this World, as the ME goes rogue. We can prosper out the wazoo, if and when Obama and his Cloward-Piven/engineered crisis (just like down on the Border right now) bunch are thrown out of office. He and his ilk are idiots if they believe that a crashed private economy will automatically result in an Social Democratic/Authoritarian Socialist State. It's not in our DNA...far to competitive, individualistic and fair-minded (earn what you get).
*Socialism* safety net...absolutely. Socialism hammock, from cradle to grave. Hell no.
Posted on 6/27/14 at 9:26 am to a want
quote:And yet voting for more and more.
Delaware is bending over backwards and forwards for America.
Posted on 6/27/14 at 9:28 am to a want
And yet Mississippi's liberals and soft Republicans are more than happy to keep feeding at the federal trough. I'm sure at some point their state will begin its climb in all the rankings it's been waiting for! The clear answer is to keep doing what they've been doing.
Posted on 6/27/14 at 9:31 am to a want
Has anyone of those liberal-rag articles that post that skewed statistic over and over ad nauseum ever stopped to think that the reason those states are so "red" is BECAUSE of the "welfare" (and not for the reasons they're insinuating)? Maybe, it's because they have to deal with the effects of that transferance of wealth and they want to it to stop. That's why they're red, because they have to live every day with the effects. What's the percent of the population on government assistance, living beneath the poverty line in Mississippi compared to Delaware? What is the percent of the population in the top 1% of income in the U.S. in Mississippi vs Delaware? What is the percent of the population in the top 1% of income adjusted for cost of living in Mississippi vs Delaware?
But no, they'll never ask that question. They just want to jump to the easiest conclusion, grab the low-hanging fruit, and bash their "enemy". The only possible reason must be that Republicans are racist hypocrites who want to hoard all of our money to themselves. It gives me the feeling that maybe they're projecting just a little too much.
But no, they'll never ask that question. They just want to jump to the easiest conclusion, grab the low-hanging fruit, and bash their "enemy". The only possible reason must be that Republicans are racist hypocrites who want to hoard all of our money to themselves. It gives me the feeling that maybe they're projecting just a little too much.
Posted on 6/27/14 at 9:32 am to a want
quote:
Mississippi received a jaw-dropping $2.02 in federal money for every $1 of taxes its residents sent to Washington
Kind of tired of seeing this kind of stat thrown around like it's meaningful.
What accounts for it- Medicaid? SSDI? Military Bases? Medicare? Federal Parks? Does it include foregone oil royalties for LA? And how does the exact type of spending differ by state?
Posted on 6/27/14 at 9:33 am to kingbob
The best part of it all is that when liberals complain about red states getting all this money, they're really endorsing the Republican position of cutting welfare spending.
Posted on 6/27/14 at 9:36 am to Mr.Perfect
quote:
maybe you should look at a demographics map overlayed on top of federal social spending....
let me know when you have your "ah ha" moment.
Katrina helped break up some of that issue for Louisiana, much to the eternal dismay of Houston, San Antonio, and other areas.
Posted on 6/27/14 at 9:42 am to RCDfan1950
quote:
In all honesty, it's true that the Government (QE based) has become a major source of direct and indirect jobs, as well as outright subsidizer for unemployed/unemployable folk. Especially in States with minority populations, but not very vibrant economic manufacturing base. Cochran did his job, brought home the bacon, as he was elected to do.
...
The answer to this whole - very dangerous - economic scenario...is a HEALTHY ECONOMY.
Yeah, as I'm looking at these question I'm pondering what the REAL answer is. It's hard. Our system rewards politicians who bring home the bacon...and that's pretty much all there is to it.
Cochran who has been there forever is on the most powerful committees (like all lifers). This means he can whore himself out. He will agree to vote to fund/approve/move forward with your project as it moves through his committee - as long as you vote for his legislation (or someone else's he whoring with) to push more federal dollars to Mississippi. The guys on the big committees are incredibly powerful.
Term limits is about the only solution I can come up with. It prevents states and districts from amassing so much power and the ability to extract concessions ($) from junior members. This is (in part) what leads to these incredible imbalances in spending.
This post was edited on 6/27/14 at 9:44 am
Posted on 6/27/14 at 9:43 am to teke184
A lot of people have returned and most didn't go very far like to the west Bank and Baton Rouge.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News