KHH1

Don't let CA bother you..it has weathered the storm before....If we could keep all of our revenues and not feed the red moocher states, that would help also.........

astrolite

Where do you get that idea? Congress has given Cali. billions in every budget bill every passed in the last ten years! They asked for 30 billion last year! The reps only gave them 10 billion! no wonder they hate conservatives! But they have plenty outside the communist run cities! And is it our fault that you declared yourselves a sanctuary state? You let in millions of welfare bums and criminals and now want US to help you support them in the style they would like? How about you keep your ideology in your festering state?

KHH1

do some research regarding blue states funding red ones and CA in particular............

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_reckoning/2012/10/25/blue_state_red_face_guess_who_benefits_more_from_your_taxes.html

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/05/which-states-are-givers-and-which-are-takers/361668/

Boo_Boo Loc: Jellystone

You would not have information that is a little more current....this is after all 2015 and not 2012.

KHH1

think it changed?

astrolite

I'm sure it has! Obama has probably transfered billions from government agencys to his favorite state (they diverted millions of illegal votes to him) Don't you wonder WHY the usurper who calls himself Obama, has APPOINTED CZARS OVER ALL GOVERNMENT AGENCYS ? They already had "Heads" over each agency, under civil service rules! NOW the usurper has turned another turd over and BY HIMSELF APPOINTED bundlers, contributors and assorted perverts as (newly invented) czars! so that he has circumvented the constitution! The constitution does not provide for the president to appoint his cronies over every bureaucracy in America! (if you think it does, show me where) And has control over America by bureaucrat! Since the communists totally control ALL the media, he got away with it! Let a few communists in, and they appoint other communists! There seems to be a lot of red diaper babies!

KHH1

we'll let you do that research..those with dissenting opinions should support them...until then.....this stands......

astrolite

I was right ....YOU CAN'T refute my points!

KHH1

No I am talking about YOU finding info that proves that blue states are no longer funding red states like they were in 2012 according to the information I posted that penny said was outdated. Do you always play dumb or are you that far out of sync?

Lily

It's like 1.54 churches per year. Oh my gosh....bring out the National Guard. N O T!!!!

Boo_Boo Loc: Jellystone

The issue I take with some analysis on rich vs poor states is the methods used to correlate the data. In addition to what you presented in you link, there are other factors that have to be taken into consideration. Real world effects on states such as illegal immigration, transportation and infrastructure costs demand more federal dollars. And the method used by your web site to arrive at their findings do not account for these real world problems. Here is how they arrive at the percentages and accountability:

•“Return on Taxes Paid to the Federal Government – Weight: 1 (Federal Funding in $ / Federal Income Taxes in $) This metric illustrates how many dollars in federal funding state taxpayers receive for every one dollar in federal income taxes they pay. We have excluded from the Federal Funding the Loans/Guarantees component because it does not represent permanent transfers from the Federal Government to a state.
•Federal Funding as a Percentage of State Revenue – Weight: 1 (Federal Funding in $ / State Revenue in $) * 100 This metric shows how much of a state’s annual revenue, and theoretically its spending, is provided by the federal government. Without this money, revenue would have to be found elsewhere – perhaps via tax hikes – or else key state services would suffer.
•Number of Federal Employees Per Capita – Weight: 0.5
(No. Federal Workers / No. State Residents) This metric speaks to the federal government’s role as a nationwide employer, indicating the percentage of a state’s workforce that owes its very livelihood to Washington.”

Read those points again. It is easy to skew the figures and the analysis because all states are not equal and do not share the same ratios.

Also, for some states, Indian reservations, military bases, highway funds, national parks, non-productive federal land, and large populations of retirees also play an important role. It’s also important to note that states with higher populations — like California and New York — will tend to get more federal grants. Federal aid for natural disasters are also excluded, such as forest fires, drought, mud slides and earthquakes.

One can not paint an accurate picture of an entire state's financial status within the confinements of limited data, many other issues must be factored in. It’s both unfair and inaccurate to paint the citizens of any one state as ‘moochers’ or ‘freeloaders’ based on this data, as several factors play heavily into the circumstances individuals face across the country.

For you, an updated analysis of states, but I caution you to use the expanded considerations when reading the data, follow this link: http://wallethub.com/edu/states-most-least-dependent-on-the-federal-government/2700/#dependency-and-state-taxes

Pap Pap Loc: Etna, PA

CA is just too damned Greecy.

Cool Breeze

If you have any complaints! Take it up with Jesus comrade! http://www.biblestudytools.com/commentaries/gills-exposition-of-the-bible/exodus-20-5.html

Cool Breeze

Could it be that 'True Christianity' was corrupted by Europeans? http://www.africanchristian.org/ :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:

Cool Breeze

Evidence Please :?: