http://www.sacbee.com/2012/08/28/476452 ... rises.html
Dark567 wrote: kiklion wrote:
First off, what is a 'rich state'. I would argue California was one of the largest reasons why the democrats won. They are an 'all or nothing' state that gave Obama 55 electoral votes. They are also one of the 'poorest' states. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California#State_finances
they have 12% of the countries population but almost 1/3rd of the countries welfare recipients as well as being in debt 265 billion as of January 2011.
California, by almost any normal measure, isn't a poor state.
Largest debt in the nation and up there in per capita debt. I see 4 states with more and 5 that are equal (can't see Alaska/Hawaii on this map.)
Well, the state that receives the most net federal money (that is, inflow minus outflow via income taxes, etc.) per capita is Alaska, with a net 15k per person.Down at the bottom of the graphic here is a list of states in order of dollar received per dollar spent.
The first solid red state on that list is Texas, at 94 cents received per dollar spent. Swing states are fairly spread out, and the most intaking blue state is Hawaii, at 1.44 dollars received per dollar spent. Going through the list, red states basically fill the bottom of the list, and blue states the top.
Well, that is kind of my point. The republicans who are talking about being unfairly taxed and are against hand outs, may be talking about direct handouts such as welfare, unemployment, housing subsidies etc. That sounds like it includes all federal money spent in that state. If you work for the government, it doesn't mean the government is handing out money. You earned it through a service, preferably the government viewed your service as worth more than what they paid for it. I apologize if this chart was only about money handed out directly to people and not for services rendered, taxfoundation.org is a pretty big site to search thoroughly and to try to find what data/reports the chart was based off of.
Yakk wrote:Alaska is a true welfare state, with its citizens getting 2$ in total government services for every 1$ they pay in taxes.
The federal government manages 240 million acres of land in Alaska. It gets the most money per capita and the least money per square mile. Both metrics are worthless in this case.
Why does the government manage so much land? This is old but was the best I found, http://nrm.salrm.uaf.edu/~stodd/AlaskaP ... rship.html
the state only owns 24% of the land in Alaska. Unfortunately, I don't understand all of the terminology on this page. Do people live on Public Domain Lands that are federally owned? What about Private Land? I vaguely remember prior campaigns to remove those National Parks to allow for oil drilling. If that was supported by Alaskans it would be in poor spirit to claim them to be slackers if we don't even allow them to use their land as they want. If the Federal Government is forcing them to not utilize their land, then the Federal Government should pay for it. Which is one more reason to only look at direct handouts such as Welfare, Unemployment etc.
~Edit, Hell, if the Federal Government still owns so much of the Alaskan land, why even cal it part of the Alaskan state? It seems there is enough land there to create a 51st state and call it Federalia!
~Edit 2: It seems odd that you can deduct state taxes from your federal income tax. Here, a state with 0% income tax would be paying more of their income as tax to the federal government than a state with 10% income tax. So by having increase state tax levels, you can prevent the government from getting the money in the first place so you don't need to receive it back. So this further dilutes the importance of the report that detailed money given to the federal government vs money received. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_tax_ ... ted_States http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_income_tax
The first link here should be read with a grain of salt, while Alaska may have the highest tax per capita, it also has no sales tax nor income tax. So all of the tax it does get seems to be come corporations and it's per capita is so high because it doesn't have a lot of people.