Surprising tax information

[tbone]

The Tax Foundation has released a fascinating report showing which states benefit from federal tax and spending policies, and which states foot the bill.

The report shows that of the 32 states (and the District of Columbia) that are "winners" -- receiving more in federal spending than they pay in federal taxes -- 76% are Red States that voted for George Bush in 2000. Indeed, 17 of the 20 (85%) states receiving the most federal spending per dollar of federal taxes paid are Red States. Here are the Top 10 states that feed at the federal trough (with Red States highlighted in bold):

This surprises me seeing as how "conservatives" don't believe in gov't help.

TaxProf Blog: Red States Feed at Federal Trough, Blue States Supply the Feed

[DosEquis]

They don't believe in government help for anyone else but themselves.

[Diesel66]

Something posted 3 years ago is surprising ?

Oh look poor states receive federal aid. And rich states dont.

Originally Posted by tbone

This surprises me seeing as how "conservatives" don't believe in gov't help.

Explain the logic behind that statement please.
The article doesnt even try to line up which party CREATED the program. Nope, just jumps right to the end going omg states that voted republican get more federal aid.



Not to mention, Conservatives are a minority in the Republican party. Bush or most any other Republican pushes for a bill doesnt mean conservatives agree with it.

[WickedLou9]

This came out around the time of the last presidential election.

[tbone]

Sorry, it was new to me. It's surprising because states that voted republican get the most federal aid, yet you would assume those states also don't want federal aid as that is one of the base beliefs of republicans to not have government aid.

[WickedLou9]

Originally Posted by tbone

Sorry, it was new to me. It's surprising because states that voted republican get the most federal aid, yet you would assume those states also don't want federal aid as that is one of the base beliefs of republicans to not have government aid.

Oh they like aid alright. As long as it goes where they want. IE farm subsidies and such. As long as we don't help out any poor people they are OK with it.

[Publius]

Not surprising at all. Farm subsidies make up one of the largest segments of our budget. It's retarded and hypocritical.

[DosEquis]

The bottom line is they are cool with welfare for farmers but not for the inner city.

[goldenponderbob]

Wouldn't those figures reflect "business as usual madness" of single-party politics which was the "game in town" until relief came last January.

Fiscally speaking, the blue crowd hasn't been driving the machinery long enough to change that, but have patience. When Hill takes control, single party stuff be back in business.

Back in the sixties during Johnson's "great society/war on poverty" crap, urban leaders used to be heard screaming that the vast majority of the dough the democrats were spending on poverty, never got to where the poor people were.

Very little respecting federal tax/spend policies have ever made sense.

How far back do you suppose you'd have to go to when politicians (take your pick of party in charge) were blasting tobacco growers for the health problems their products were causing, while simultaneously endorsing the subsidies and protections those same farmer/producers enjoyed.

Does anyone remember Senator Proxmire, the golden fleese guy, I'm not supposing I'll ever see his ilk in my lifetime.

[6SpeedTA95]

Originally Posted by Publius

Not surprising at all. Farm subsidies make up one of the largest segments of our budget. It's retarded and hypocritical.

I agree farm subsidies are a joke but what people fail to realize is that some of this isn't subsidies a lot of it is things like transportation aka highway funding and similar things.