Full Version: Red State Hypocrisy?
QUOTE
I believe there is an important distinction between how “red” voters and “blue” voters view the role of government. In a nutshell I believe it boils down to two very different political views: individualism and collective socialism (respectively).
I believe there is currently a struggle going on in the U.S. between these two views on the political spectrum. I believe there is currently a struggle going on in the U.S. between these two views on the political spectrum. The intellectual elites adhere more closely to a collective socialist view, whereas “fly over” America, or middle America, whatever you want to call it – adheres more closely to the individualism view. I think this point is supported if you look at how the 2004 election vote played out. I think this point is supported if you look at how the 2004 election vote played out.
I believe there is currently a struggle going on in the U.S. between these two views on the political spectrum. I believe there is currently a struggle going on in the U.S. between these two views on the political spectrum. The intellectual elites adhere more closely to a collective socialist view, whereas “fly over” America, or middle America, whatever you want to call it – adheres more closely to the individualism view. I think this point is supported if you look at how the 2004 election vote played out. I think this point is supported if you look at how the 2004 election vote played out.
This statement in a nutshell condenses what the Red State and Republicans will claim is the biggest difference betweenn them and Blue State Tax and Spend Liberals,
Yet a review of who takes what and how much from the Federal Government shows that
the Red States seem to get an inordinate amount of money from Washington and the Evils of Tax money.
Some get back far more than they put in.
http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/20...tates_feed.html
http://www.taxfoundation.org/taxingspending.html
According to a report done by the Tax Foundation--A bastion of Liberalism
The states that get the most from Washington are not who you might think they are
States Receiving Most in Federal Spending Per Dollar of Federal Taxes Paid:
1. D.C. ($6.17)
2. North Dakota ($2.03)
3. New Mexico ($1.89)
4. Mississippi ($1.84)
5. Alaska ($1.82)
6. West Virginia ($1.74)
7. Montana ($1.64)
8. Alabama ($1.61)
9. South Dakota ($1.59)
10. Arkansas ($1.53)
States Receiving Least in Federal Spending Per Dollar of Federal Taxes Paid:
1. New Jersey ($0.62)
2. Connecticut ($0.64)
3. New Hampshire ($0.68)
4. Nevada ($0.73)
5. Illinois ($0.77)
6. Minnesota ($0.77)
7. Colorado ($0.79)
8. Massachusetts ($0.79)
9. California ($0.81)
10. New York ($0.81)
OUCH! Can Blue States get a refund?
What does this say about the constant claims by "conservatives" who rail against Taxes and depending on Big Government?
Should States that are represented by the "Red" remove themselves from the tax trough and truly live according to their principles?
This is not a failure of the "red" states, it is a failure of the system.
The current tax structure encourages states to grab money anytime they can. Actually, it benefits legislators to get this money for their states.
On top of that, the demographics of the situation need to be examined. California is one of the largest economies in the world, let alone in the United States. Since they are rich, they are penalized by the "progressive" tax structure of the US. States like Alabama, Mississippi, and DC are (on the flip side) recipients, because they are relatively poor.
Should States that are represented by the "Red" remove themselves from the tax trough and truly live according to their principles?
Wouldn't that mean we would get rid of the income redistribution that we currently have? I am sure the worthies in California and New York would be horrified if their money was re-distributed back to wealthy states like California and New York
.
The system is set up as a free for all grab for money. The operation of government has litle to do with individual philosophies. It is about getting re-elected. Getting re-elected (unfortunately) often means getting some pork for your state.
In summary: "Don't hate the player, hate the game."
The current tax structure encourages states to grab money anytime they can. Actually, it benefits legislators to get this money for their states.
On top of that, the demographics of the situation need to be examined. California is one of the largest economies in the world, let alone in the United States. Since they are rich, they are penalized by the "progressive" tax structure of the US. States like Alabama, Mississippi, and DC are (on the flip side) recipients, because they are relatively poor.
Should States that are represented by the "Red" remove themselves from the tax trough and truly live according to their principles?
Wouldn't that mean we would get rid of the income redistribution that we currently have? I am sure the worthies in California and New York would be horrified if their money was re-distributed back to wealthy states like California and New York
.The system is set up as a free for all grab for money. The operation of government has litle to do with individual philosophies. It is about getting re-elected. Getting re-elected (unfortunately) often means getting some pork for your state.
In summary: "Don't hate the player, hate the game."
Amlord the rhetoric of the stereotypical red stater always involves the evil of Liberals and washington and collective socialism. yet according to the report it seems that several of these states wouldn't have much without money from the federal government--and they are taking much more than they put in.
I am all for replacing the current tax system--flat tax baby!
What about the principle of the whole thing?
govt==bad
Liberals==bad
tax money they didn't pay in ==gimme gimme gimme
Where is the conservative outrage over this?
I am tired enough of wasteful spending as it is without having to learn that the reason some states tax their citizens so little is because they are taking from everyone else.
As for examining the demographics of the situation it shakes out fairly accurate, the Tax Foundation isn't exactly a Liberal front. Find better defense of the Bush tax cuts and exactly who the wealthy Americans are--married working couples with children--not thousands of Walmart heirs.
Theft is theft regardless if everyone else does it.
I am all for replacing the current tax system--flat tax baby!
What about the principle of the whole thing?
govt==bad
Liberals==bad
tax money they didn't pay in ==gimme gimme gimme
Where is the conservative outrage over this?
I am tired enough of wasteful spending as it is without having to learn that the reason some states tax their citizens so little is because they are taking from everyone else.
As for examining the demographics of the situation it shakes out fairly accurate, the Tax Foundation isn't exactly a Liberal front. Find better defense of the Bush tax cuts and exactly who the wealthy Americans are--married working couples with children--not thousands of Walmart heirs.
Theft is theft regardless if everyone else does it.
What does this say about the constant claims by "conservatives" who rail against Taxes and depending on Big Government?
Nothing, it is simply the Robin Hood tax code v. geography and population. For example, consider the tax that goes to N. and S. Dakota on highways alone and compare the number of citizens per square mile of roadway to NJ. Consider a larger proportion of NJ citizens don’t pay highway taxes nor have to fund school bus routes 50 or 60 miles long.
Should States that are represented by the "Red" remove themselves from the tax trough and truly live according to their principles?
The Republican Party constantly tries to reduce the size of government.
A flat tax would be great but without Robin Hood taking all the tax from the top 5% where would the money to run the government come from. Germany has the system of 17% flat sales and then they had to add a gas tax that puts the retail at around $6 a gallon and still not enough tax, they go into the home and tax the stuff you buy.
On a flat tax the states would have to give up state rights to tax. Otherwise each state would set up tolls on cargo carriers moving through their states to make up what they couldn’t get based on the geography v. tax code in existence. Some states give tax breaks to companies to locate in their states and under a flat tax this contract would be void. A flat tax to replace all current tax and spend by the government (S) would have to be 55% on each purchase and you would still have to pay SS and Medicare.
Nothing, it is simply the Robin Hood tax code v. geography and population. For example, consider the tax that goes to N. and S. Dakota on highways alone and compare the number of citizens per square mile of roadway to NJ. Consider a larger proportion of NJ citizens don’t pay highway taxes nor have to fund school bus routes 50 or 60 miles long.
Should States that are represented by the "Red" remove themselves from the tax trough and truly live according to their principles?
The Republican Party constantly tries to reduce the size of government.
A flat tax would be great but without Robin Hood taking all the tax from the top 5% where would the money to run the government come from. Germany has the system of 17% flat sales and then they had to add a gas tax that puts the retail at around $6 a gallon and still not enough tax, they go into the home and tax the stuff you buy.
On a flat tax the states would have to give up state rights to tax. Otherwise each state would set up tolls on cargo carriers moving through their states to make up what they couldn’t get based on the geography v. tax code in existence. Some states give tax breaks to companies to locate in their states and under a flat tax this contract would be void. A flat tax to replace all current tax and spend by the government (S) would have to be 55% on each purchase and you would still have to pay SS and Medicare.
This is a simplified version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.