Hacker News Reader

Comment by galaxyLogic | Hacker News Reader

"Here’s the irony. Residents of “blue” states send more tax money to Washington than they get back in federal help, while residents of “red” states send less money to Washington than they get back in federal help ... blue states are sending welfare to red states – the same red states that say they don’t like welfare."

https://www.salon.com/2018/11/16/how-blue-states-help-red-st...

To caricature the situation a bit: Red States don't like to pay Federal taxes. They only like to receive tax-dollars from the Federal Government

View on HN

California is now at parity

https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/California-no-l...

Something's going on with California, the Covid-numbers are so high, it must be the laid-back attitude

Note that "receives as much as it contributes" does not mean "fair share". Because the federal budget deficit has ballooned under the last 3 presidents, the federal government now spends significantly more than it makes. This is reflected in the map in your article: only 8 states contribute more than they receive, and it's usually $0.98/0.99 on the dollar, while the ones that receive can get up to $2+.

The balance is made up by government debt, which will eventually be monetized by inflation, which acts as a tax on savers & retirees for the benefit of those who receive direct government payments. Not sure why more people aren't mad about this, but maybe the economic effects are a bit too indirect for people to notice.

The state of California or any other state does not pay a cent to another state or to the federal government. It is residents of California that pay federal taxes, which in turn provide funding and services to states and individuals.

In any case, there is no massive subsidy from "blue states" to "red states". As claydavisss mentioned, Californians get back about $0.99 for every $1 they pay in federal taxes.(http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-sac-california-federa...) Each Oregonian gets about $2,000 more from the federal government than he pays in taxes (https://osc.state.ny.us/reports/budget/2015/fed_budget_fy201...). Of the ten states with the highest per-capita surpluses (i.e., the ones that are "subsidized" the most by other states), five voted for Trump and five for Clinton.

> Of the ten states with the highest per-capita surpluses (i.e., the ones that are "subsidized" the most by other states), five voted for Trump and five for Clinton.

Can you gives us a link to this statistic? Thanks

The second URL in my comment.

Thanks the reason I was asking was that in that document I don't see data about which state voted for Clinton or Trump.

(I'm going to respond to your original comment, which I quote below.)

"Thanks the reason I was asking was that in that document I don't see data about which state voted for Clinton or Trump. But I can see that of the states which paid the least most seem to be "Red States". No? West Virginia Kentucky New Mexico Arkansas Idaho South Carolina Alabama Utah North Carolina Tennessee Georgia Maine Arizona Indiana Louisiana Ohio Oklahoma Missouri "

You are looking at the wrong list. The one on page 6 only shows per capita taxes paid to the federal government by residents of the states. The one on page 9 shows how much per capita the federal government transfers to states and to individual citizens. The one on page 5 combines the two.

Of the ten states at the top of the page 5 list—the ones that get the most back (after subtracting taxes paid) from the federal government—five voted for Trump (MS, AL, WV, KY, SC) and five vote for Hillary (NM, VA, ME, HI, MD).

According to Associated Press:

"High-tax, traditionally Democratic states (blue), subsidize low-tax, traditionally Republican states (red) — in a big way."

https://apnews.com/article/2f83c72de1bd440d92cdbc0d3b6bc08c

The article is an example of malicious omission. The actual Rockefeller Institute data (https://rockinst.org/issue-areas/fiscal-analysis/balance-of-...) shows that it's not so much "blue states" but four very wealthy Northeast states (the Tri-State area plus Massachusetts) that account for the bulk of citizens paying more than they receive from the federal government. I can guarantee that this was exactly the same in 1920, when all four states (especially MA) were moderately to strongly Republican, because they were even wealthier compared to the rest of the country than today.

The 10 states at the bottom of the Rockefeller report's per capita list—that is, the states that benefit from the most federal spending per person compared to how much each person pays in federal taxes—are

Hillary-voting states: VA, NM, MD, HI, ME

Trump-voting states: KY, AK, AL, WV, MS

... which is exactly what I said, based on the State of New York report I cited.

"The biggest givers in our latest report, based on 2018 data, were New York, which paid in US$22 billion more than it received; New Jersey, which paid $12 billion more; Massachusetts, which paid $9 billion more; and Connecticut, which paid $8 billion more than it received."

So the 4 biggest payers in 2018 were New York, New Jersey, Massachusets and Connecticut. Aren't these all "blue states"?

The 4 biggest recipients are Alabama, Kentucky, Maryland, Virginia. Aren't those all "red states"?

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/articles/2020-05-15/...

Actual numbers: https://rockinst.org/issue-areas/fiscal-analysis/balance-of-...

>So the 4 biggest payers in 2018 were New York, New Jersey, Massachusets and Connecticut. Aren't these all "blue states"?

Yes, but my point is that those states are subsidizing almost the rest of the country, no matter who those other states voted for.

>The 4 biggest recipients are Alabama, Kentucky, Maryland, Virginia. Aren't those all "red states"?

No. Maryland is a very Democratic state, and Virginia is a swing state that has recently voted mostly Democratic, including for Hillary in 2016.

>Actual numbers: https://rockinst.org/issue-areas/fiscal-analysis/balance-of-...

Why are you linking this URL as if I needed to see it, as if I didn't cite it in my previous comment?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com