Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT
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 frombut the state a military base is in benefits far, far, far more than however you think a state that doesn't have that military base in it benefits from it.. 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states) that's not available to residents of states with low tax states (red states), the SALT deductionDidn't that get repealed or am I wrong?.
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.
Threaded Mode