Another Round Of Trying To Forgive Loans

[Scouts Honor]

the whole federal spending received vs. extracted is disingenuous

the states with the highest ratio dont have any major corps. their income is lower and so they pay lower amounts of tax.

states like cali and texas at .80  have large corp. there...

not apples to apples

[BobDole]

5 minutes ago, Scouts Honor said:

the whole federal spending received vs. extracted is disingenuous

the states with the highest ratio dont have any major corps. their income is lower and so they pay lower amounts of tax.

states like cali and texas at .80  have large corp. there...

not apples to apples

Socialism

[Scouts Honor]

it always has been bob

but to argue that blue states fund red states based on this ratio

 is incorrect.

[Husker_Du]

15 hours ago, Le duke said:

 

Excuses and bail outs, eh? Conservative economic policy in a nutshell. Wealth redistribution from blue to red.

I would prefer that I keep more of my (blue state) tax dollars in-state instead of bailing out red states. Particularly the south.

Unfortunately, they have a laundry list of excuses, such as, “We’re fat, drunk, have the worst educational systems by far and can’t get by without blue state tax dollars. Woe is me. Send me more money, blue states/Federal government, for I am poor.”

Hopefully the federal government doesn’t bail Florida out when the next big one hits. ***duck duck goose** ‘em. Their inflation rate is more than twice the national average, the two largest insurers just pulled out and illegal immigrants are scared to work there. Let that dump fester and rot.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

can you do the math and figure out how contradictory your stance is or do i have to do it for you?

[BobDole]

50 minutes ago, Scouts Honor said:

it always has been bob

but to argue that blue states fund red states based on this ratio

 is incorrect.

Since red states are so against socialism they shouldn't accept these funds right?

[Scouts Honor]

so what about blue states who want to be able to right off state taxes on their  fed tax papers?

 

[BobDole]

1 minute ago, Scouts Honor said:

so what about blue states who want to be able to right off state taxes on their  fed tax papers?

 

Answer my question first, obviously it will pain you to type the answer so I'll let you do it. Better yet, I'm sure you'll go on a 10 post spree without anyone replying of random crap you've found on the internet.

[MPhillips]

2 hours ago, BobDole said:

No one is exactly thrilled about illegal immigrants coming in here ILLEGALY. However, without them doing a lot of low level labor our country would have trouble in industries such as construction and agriculture.

Doubt that Shillie has ever eaten a vegetable let alone know where they come from and probably never held a hammer...

[MPhillips]

3 minutes ago, BobDole said:

I'm sure you'll go on a 10 post spree without anyone replying of random crap you've found on the internet.

MS Light

[Le duke]

can you do the math and figure out how contradictory your stance is or do i have to do it for you?

If California contributes $300 and gets $195 back, and Mississippi contributes $50 and gets $130 back, please explain how my “blue states fund red states” stance is wrong. Where do you think that money for Mississippi comes from?

Hint: Those are the actual ratios of contributions vs returns for those two states.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Bigbrog]

19 minutes ago, Le duke said:

If California contributes $300 and gets $195 back, and Mississippi contributes $50 and gets $130 back, please explain how my “blue states fund red states” stance is wrong. Where do you think that money for Mississippi comes from?

Hint: Those are the actual ratios of contributions vs returns for those two states.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Your take is such a partisan one it is almost laughable.  You do realize that the reason Suckafornia contributes so much is they are taxed WAY more than say, Florida due to each individual states policies.  And the reason for a state to receive funding is vast and should be taken into account when making such statements of "blue states" fund "red states".  It is a reach at best to try and make any sort of deduction about "blue" or "red" states from how much federal funding a state gets.  Each state would have to be looked at individually as to their balance sheet.  

It actually would have been fine if you said something like "According to some formula a group of people used, 7 out of 10 states that receive the most federal funding typically vote republican.  You can NOT make any sort of comparative to one state versus the other because of it.  Heck you can't really make a determination of "good" or "bad" in terms of the individual state depending on how much federal funding it receives.  

Overall it is a stupid way to look at things and a laughable way to try and divide further.

[Scouts Honor]

3 hours ago, Scouts Honor said:

it always has been bob

but to argue that blue states fund red states based on this ratio

 is incorrect.

i already did bob.

[Le duke]

Your take is such a partisan one it is almost laughable.  You do realize that the reason Suckafornia contributes so much is they are taxed WAY more than say, Florida due to each individual states policies.  And the reason for a state to receive funding is vast and should be taken into account when making such statements of "blue states" fund "red states".  It is a reach at best to try and make any sort of deduction about "blue" or "red" states from how much federal funding a state gets.  Each state would have to be looked at individually as to their balance sheet.  
It actually would have been fine if you said something like "According to some formula a group of people used, 7 out of 10 states that receive the most federal funding typically vote republican.  You can NOT make any sort of comparative to one state versus the other because of it.  Heck you can't really make a determination of "good" or "bad" in terms of the individual state depending on how much federal funding it receives.  
Overall it is a stupid way to look at things and a laughable way to try and divide further.

Are you honestly suggesting that Florida’s state tax policy has anything to do with FEDERAL taxes in California?

We have reached a new level here. You cannot be helped.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Scouts Honor]

 and why is it no one responded to those facts

[Scouts Honor]

acutally i was wrong before.. according to AP

cali's ratio  is .96

so if they pay 300 they get back 288

 

 

[Scouts Honor]

11 minutes ago, Scouts Honor said:

 and why is it no one responded to those facts

oh thats right.. they have been told enough times what they should believe and no facts will change their minds

[Le duke]

acutally i was wrong before.. according to AP
cali's ratio  is .96
so if they pay 300 they get back 288
 
 

Please cite a source.

Nothing I’ve found suggests anything higher than 0.70.

https://smartasset.com/data-studies/states-most-dependent-on-the-federal-government-2022

https://wallethub.com/edu/states-most-least-dependent-on-the-federal-government/2700

https://www.moneygeek.com/living/states-most-reliant-federal-government/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Scouts Honor]

https://apnews.com/article/north-america-business-local-taxes-ap-top-news-politics-2f83c72de1bd440d92cdbc0d3b6bc08c

California fared a bit better than other blue states. It received 96 cents for every dollar the state sent to Washington.

[Paul158]

12 minutes ago, Scouts Honor said:

https://apnews.com/article/north-america-business-local-taxes-ap-top-news-politics-2f83c72de1bd440d92cdbc0d3b6bc08c

California fared a bit better than other blue states. It received 96 cents for every dollar the state sent to Washington.

 

12 minutes ago, Scouts Honor said:

https://apnews.com/article/north-america-business-local-taxes-ap-top-news-politics-2f83c72de1bd440d92cdbc0d3b6bc08c

California fared a bit better than other blue states. It received 96 cents for every dollar the state sent to Washington.

Those pesky old facts. Scouts Honor you know democrats get bothered  when you use them. 

[Le duke]

Those pesky old facts. Scouts Honor you know democrats get bothered  when you use them. 

You might want to read the article, note that it’s from 2017, and wonder what tax policy/law has been passed since then.

Also, the first three paragraphs:

WASHINGTON (AP) — Republican leaders have spent months promoting the myth that red low-tax states are subsidizing blue high-tax states because of the deduction for state and local taxes.

An Associated Press Fact Check finds it’s actually the other way around. High-tax, traditionally Democratic states (blue), subsidize low-tax, traditionally Republican states (red) — in a big way.

Republicans are trying to eliminate the deduction as part of the sweeping tax package working its way through Congress. They added back a deduction for up to $10,000 in property taxes, in a concession to Republicans from high-tax states such as New York and New Jersey. California Republicans are pushing to extend the deduction to local income taxes, too.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Paul158]

6 minutes ago, Le duke said:

You might want to read the article, note that it’s from 2017, and wonder what tax policy/law has been passed since then.

Also, the first three paragraphs:

WASHINGTON (AP) — Republican leaders have spent months promoting the myth that red low-tax states are subsidizing blue high-tax states because of the deduction for state and local taxes.

An Associated Press Fact Check finds it’s actually the other way around. High-tax, traditionally Democratic states (blue), subsidize low-tax, traditionally Republican states (red) — in a big way.

Republicans are trying to eliminate the deduction as part of the sweeping tax package working its way through Congress. They added back a deduction for up to $10,000 in property taxes, in a concession to Republicans from high-tax states such as New York and New Jersey. California Republicans are pushing to extend the deduction to local income taxes, too.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I read it. 2017 . Would like to see the updated  information.

[Le duke]

I read it. 2017 . Would like to see the updated  information.

https://www.moneygeek.com/living/states-most-reliant-federal-government/


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Offthemat]

When this first came out this was proven an inaccurate statement: blue states pay more and get less back from federal taxes.  The reason, as Bigbrog pointed out, is that each state is different.  California wages are higher than Mississippi, and even though Mississippi is a red state, it does have democrats there.  Another example was that some states have military bases that a lot of federal dollars go to.  Some states will get federal dollars for construction projects but the bid goes to out of state contractor and suppliers  Federal dollars are spent on so many different things, in so many different states that change or move around from day to day, that it would be different by the time you calculated what they all are.  The problem is, the amount of dollars they waste, and they continue to spend more than they have.  

[Le duke]

If you’re going to say it was “proven” to be incorrect, show us.

Show me proof.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Husker_Du]

can we just all agree that California is a mismanaged trainwreck?

i mean, things are getting dark around here. let's just all find something we can agree on.