Right. Doesn't change any of the facts that the red states all depend on the blue states, are subsidized by them and are all at the bottom of all the social welfare stats.

When you do a ridiculously simple univariate look at the data, you know what the potential issues are. If you're comparing red states and blue states in terms of what they pay in federal taxes and what they get, you need to make adjustments, off the top of my head I can think of - you need to adjust for federal money for massive military bases. The money that the feds spend on huge military bases in red states, isn't an example of red states getting handouts. Its something that all 50 states benefit from. Also, there's always been a big federal income tax deduction in high state tax states (blue states) that's not available to residents of states with low tax states (red states), the SALT deduction.

You need to make it specific to welfare type spending, not all federal spending. But that doesn't tell the right story.

And for sure, we need to adjust those numbers to reflect student loan forgiveness, which is a big transfer of money from red states to blue states.

You have yet to disprove any of the numerous examples showing how the red states lag in every? major social welfare category. Instead you only bring up income tax.

You have samples based on 331,000,000 (a very "credible" number) data points yet you constantly try to look a very small (ten thousand or so) sample and state some red state is better bc of that infinitesimal sample.

Almost 40% of Kansas' GDP is based on fed spending.

I have never denied that red states lag in certain statistics. This is why I wouldn't throw a dart at a map of a red state and move there.

You're doing what they all do, you're responding to something I never said. I never said every part of Mississippi is better than every part of CT. I said there are huge advantages of living in CT.

But I also said this, and I dare you to refute it...there are specific areas of the US, nice small towns with a high quality of life that do well on the statistics you'd cite, AND those places have a very low tax cost compared to other places with a high quality of life. But the places that offer a high quality of life at a low cost, are disproportionately (if not entirely) in red states. And these are the places that successful, productive, self-sufficient families from blue states, are moving to in big numbers.

I don't think you can prove that those places can't exist without tax money from Greenwich.

You are painting entire red states with the same brush. If I move to Franklin, TN (an absolutely BOOMING suburb of Nashville), I don't care that Memphis is awful, it has no impact on my quality of life. Zip.

Paul, if you were right and those states were so bad, why are people moving there? There are beautiful suburbs in NH where they can't build $600,000 houses fast enough. Who do you think is moving there? Meth heads? Trailer trash folks are buying all those big new houses?

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has endorsed a bipartisan electoral count reform bill in the Senate, giving the legislation a key boost over a similar bill the House passed last week. Both bills seek to prevent future presidents from trying to overturn election results through Congress,

Go turtle Boy 22 republicans on board . Compared to the Houses 6
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Jim
Guess how many $600k-$800k houses are for sale in NH at that Price this is from Zillow. 458 agent listing

Mass has 2024 agents listings same price range

And Fla about 1000 listings

Keep convincing yourself people are moving because of Taxes freedoms and all your other right wing talking points

Top 3 reasons

Moving For A New Job:

Moving To Reduce Your Commute:

Moving For a Loved One:

Last out of 10 retirement



https://www.tampabay.com/news/florid...-to-tampa-bay/


The answers remained a constant for so many years that in 2019 they stopped asking.

“‘The weather’ or ‘I moved here for my job’ were the two primary reasons. Considerably lower down, in third place, was ‘family,’”

But Florida’s elected leaders contend that something different is luring residents. Gov. Ron DeSantis touts the state as a destination for those fleeing COVID-19 restrictions. Chief Financial Officer Jimmy Patronis has suggested northeasterners are escaping “tax hell” for the income-tax-free Sunshine State.

Carrying Ron’s water again?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Where to even begin...

"Guess how many $600k-$800k houses are for sale in NH at that Price this is from Zillow. 458 agent listing

Mass has 2024 agents listings same price range

And Fla about 1000 listings"

I never ever came close to saying that NH has more $600k houses than MA or FL. So what the heck are you responding to? NH has a population nowhere near MA or FL. What I said, and I am 100% correct, is that there are beautiful suburbs in NH where there has been a huge boom of houses in that range - Hollis, Brookline, etc...My point was that it isn't poor trailer trash moving to these places. Go ahead and make that wrong.

When you look at reasons for moving, you need to look at reasons why people move FROM ANOTHER STATE. "Because I wanted a shorter commute", means your data is influenced be people who made a short move within the state. I'm talking about why people move from blue states to red states, not why people move from one part of FL to another part of FL.

If taxes and cost of living aren't a big draw, why is the trend from blue states to red states and not the other way around?

According to realtor.com, the 2 states in the country that gained the most residents in the past year, were TX and FL.

https://www.realtor.com/news/trends/...ng-to-florida/

Low taxes, less brutal covid lockdowns...

If it was all weather-related, people would be moving to CA in huge numbers. They aren't.

You do live in a self imposed fantasy. IN YOUR WORLD if one person moved for those reasons everyone moved for that reason

Hard to argue with that kind of logic

wayne, look at the states people are fleeing, and look at the states that are growing. What’s the commonality among each group?

CA has beautiful weather and people are leaving. So it’s not that. NH suburbs also booming so it’s not simply that everyone wants warmth. they want to not overpay for what they get. turns out people don’t want to pay exorbitant taxes and get nothing in return.

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) was the only committee member to vote against it Tuesday

His excuse


In comments to the committee Tuesday, Cruz indicated his case against the bill largely revolved around a few things: that it would diminish Congress’s authority to root out voter fraud, that it would “intrude” on the constitutional authority of states to cast their electors as they see fit, and that it would be a step toward “the federalization of elections.”
“I don’t believe senators from this side of the aisle should be supporting a bill that enhances the federalization of elections and reduces the ability of Congress to respond to the very serious problem of voter fraud,” Cruz said.

Yep that’s happening just like people moving because of taxes and Covid restrictions

It’s all a fantasy.. statistics don’t lie :kewl:

For the 10th time, look at the areas that people are leaving, what do they have in common?

Look at the areas people are flocking to, what do they have in common?

Have you noticed how often it is, and how easy it is, for me to ask you stupidly simple questions that you can't come close to answering?

What does that say about your beliefs?

Wonder why West Virginia, Louisiana and Mississippi are losing population?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

For the 10th time, look at the areas that people are leaving, what do they have in common?


JOBS