Monday, December 05, 2016

What gives with so many Red State Mooching on Blue States? By Geniusofdespair

New York Times Dec. 4th
We have the States that always vote red and always vote blue. The purple ones, can go either way - swing States. The 50 States are in order of donor States that get the least -- to taker States that get the most. So you could say the first 25 are being short-changed and the second 25 are getting the windfall (18 of the 25 takers are red States).

Isn't this SOCIALISM? I think this is Socialism. I think The Tweeter in Chief should get the States keep all the money they collect and do away with Federal taxes. Much too much SOCIALISM involved with this system. We sure ain't paying for educating these red banana brains. I like to go to Oklahoma as an example. That has to be he dumbest State of all. Fracking and the underground wastewater disposal has helped it become the most prone to earthquakes in the country. In fact if you add up all the earthquakes combined in the continental US Oklahoma tops that number.  Oklahoma recorded 857 quakes in 2015.  That leaves the other 48 U.S. states with a combined total of 729 (excluding Alaska).

Hey, don't we do wastewater disposal in Florida? Don't we want to put nuclear waste from the FPL plant into the Boulder zone (proved to NOT be confining)? We might be as stupid as Oklahoma soon: But for now OKLAHOMA THE DUMBEST STATE IN THE UNION for voting against their own interest and their environment.


WOOF said...

Red States tend to
have few residents,
but two US Senators.
The leverage of two
Us Senators is money.

Geniusofdespair said...

Wyoming and Alaska get high marks for duping the other states.

Anonymous said...

Another dimension to this is the existence of rich states and poor states. Rich states have massive amounts of unearned income. Money flows freely in those states and areas, and very little cash is used. When you do operate with cash, the bills are fairly crisp and new. In the money world they are called blue money areas. So. FL is one such area. The rest of the state is poor. In the poor states, money is generated mostly with earned income, and money is scarce. Cash in those states are mostly well worn bills, with very few crisp bills in circulation and cash is used a lot. Even through the poor states pimp off of the rich ones as far as getting more from than their share from the govt., they haven't figured out how to get the real money and become a rich area. How you vote determines who will invest in your state, and your area. Backwards voting insures that people from rich states will never invest in your state, or area. And you will always be poor, dependent on earned income, and need to be subsidized by rich states. NC may be a state who is beginning to transition into a rich state.

Anonymous said...

Last anon: that entire theory is horseshit backed up by no data ever.

And the implications that the people in "blue States" are of money undermines the other favorite bullshit theory of the right wing that people living in cities are all on welfare.

Make up your mind already.