Givers vs takers, by state

[redandguilty]

I used the per capita Federal taxation and spending stats from here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_spending_and_taxation_across_states

and figured out what the per capita net is for states that went republican vs democrat. On average, people in states that went to the democrats paid $1,262 more in taxes than their states got back in spending while people in states that went republican got $600 more in spending than they paid in taxes. Oversimplification, yes (I bet that stat is driven by the rep/dem correlation to population density - not individual ideologies), but if the stat went the other way, I bet you'd hear about it on a certain news channel.

 

[tsmith7559]

Im sure we have an exit poll somewhere that identifys food stamp recipients and their voting preference.
you can't go by your data....you cant take a state stat and try to dicifer it down to this level

I'm sure there is a stat on federal assistance tied to voting precinct...I doubt they want to release that info

 

[Michchamp]

you can't go by your data....you cant take a state stat and try to dicifer it down to this level

god you are fucking stupid.

 

[tsmith7559]

god you are fucking stupid.

well, well, well.....
http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces...ml?pid=ACS_11_1YR_GCT2201.ST04&prodType=table

fyi...districts 5(flint), 12(s. oakland co & s macomb co), 13(det), 14(det) , 15 (wayne co)are democratic, lol.....and went heavily for barry...go figure

 

[redandguilty]

you can't go by your data....you cant take a state stat and try to dicifer it down to this level

 

[tsmith7559]

dam straight....use my link and take a look by zip code, census block.....warning:you may not like what you find, ie, takers are from strong democratic areas...no surprise

 

[redandguilty]

dam straight....use my link and take a look by zip code, census block.....warning:you may not like what you find, ie, takers are from strong democratic areas...no surprise

It's seems you do not understand what is meant by "You don't say". It is sarcastic and equivalent to saying something like "tell me something I don't know." Its purpose is to let you know that I'm already aware and that continuing to make the argument is unnecessary. It's appropriate here because I presented some data and followed it with a caveat. Then you told me you can't go by that data and sort of repeated my caveat (with less clarity; I suggested a potential reason.) By repeating what I just said as if you were correcting me, you opened the door to the Nicolas Cage cartoon.

 

[tsmith7559]

It's seems you do not understand what is meant by "You don't say". It is sarcastic and equivalent to saying something like "tell me something I don't know." Its purpose is to let you know that I'm already aware and that continuing to make the argument is unnecessary. It's appropriate here because I presented some data and followed it with a caveat. Then you told me you can't go by that data and sort of repeated my caveat (with less clarity; I suggested a potential reason.) By repeating what I just said as if you were correcting me, you opened the door to the Nicolas Cage cartoon.

I really dont know Nicolas Cage.....sorry your post meant nothing to me


purpose of the thread was....?

 

[redandguilty]

I really dont know Nicolas Cage.....sorry your post meant nothing to me


purpose of the thread was....?

You don't need to know Nicolas Cage to get it. The specific movie/scene has nothing to do with it. The absurd expression is intended to help convey the sarcasm, that's all.

The purpose of the thread is to comment on the media and the givers/takers argument. The givers/takers idea, while there may be some truth to it, it is not an overwhelming and driving factor behind what happened. It doesn't reveal itself in stats calculated at the level electoral votes are counted and the liberal media has been, in my opinion, restrained by not making this point. If the facts supported the idea, I have little doubt it would appear on FOX News.

 

[tsmith7559]

You don't need to know Nicolas Cage to get it. The specific movie/scene has nothing to do with it. The absurd expression is intended to help convey the sarcasm, that's all.

The purpose of the thread is to comment on the media and the givers/takers argument. The givers/takers idea, while there may be some truth to it, it is not an overwhelming and driving factor behind what happened. It doesn't reveal itself in stats calculated at the level electoral votes are counted and the liberal media has been, in my opinion, restrained by not making this point. If the facts supported the idea, I have little doubt it would appear on FOX News.

I disagree.....I think you can draw a correlation in takers and their geographic location, sex, race and age to who voted for Obama.

 

[redandguilty]

I disagree.....I think you can draw a correlation in takers and their geographic location, sex, race and age to who voted for Obama.

If you think it's true, then is someone going to actually run some numbers and report it? You'd think someone out there would want to have that fact handy if it existed. Maybe someone's working on it. They just need to find the right combination of stats to muddle the issue first.

 

[tsmith7559]

If you think it's true, then is someone going to actually run some numbers and report it? You'd think someone out there would want to have that fact handy if it existed. Maybe someone's working on it. They just need to find the right combination of stats to muddle the issue first.

i'll work on it

 

[TheVictors]

There is more to the numbers than simply generalizing a bunch of "lazy (insert group to defame) on food stamps" voting for whomever.

Southern states routinely vote down proposals for things such as public education because any public support of something like education is seen as socialism or worse, educating the subordinated workforce that exists to work for wages that are 30% lower than they were in the Unionized midwest.

So a state like Mass has some of the highest per student support and some of the nation's best public schools. Mississippi and Louisiana, on the other hand, have almost no public support of education and consequently, some of the least educated, most easily manipulated and suppressed people in the country.

Mass goes Dem and the South Block goes Red.

Fundamental difference of opinion in one sense -- those who feel that a well-educated and healthy population is good versus those who are threatened by a more well-educated and supported working class.

 

[TheVictors]

To wit, the 2006 report conducted by Michael A McDaniel of VCU:

"In this ranking, Mississippi places brain-dead-last among all states. Not surprisingly, the South dominates the lower spectrum of the list with ten of the bottom fifteen states, though it's worth noting that, led by slow-charging Arizona, the SW has recently been making impressive strides.... No southern state places in the top fifteen for IQ and only one - Virginia at #16 - sneaks above the national average. Take away the Beltway Virginians and the state very likely plummets into the cerebral ghetto occupied by its Rebel brethren...."

"The correlation matrix shows that estimated state IQ has positive correlations with gross state product, state health, and government effectiveness. Estimated state IQ correlated inversely with violent crime. Thus, states with higher estimated state IQ have greater gross state product, citizens with better health, more effective state governments and less violent crimes."

In other words, remove the South and the US instantly becomes more intelligent, healthy, safe and financially sound.


A better example for tstupid in his "pay for play" assumption would be Alaska. The voters in that state are LITERALLY PAID BY BIG OIL, so at least there we needn't worry about any subversive policy or implications.

 

[manchild98]

Each side has their own uneducated idiots for sure. But for some reason the Republicans act like they don't have a large, poor white trash base that votes republicans. And they're "takers" too. They got plenty of Obama phone types.

http://dimewars.com/Video/SMH------...cmediaid=b1219db1-b994-4d8c-8b53-49d8a403c567

 

[mhughes0021]

All the food stamp states are republican. You shouldnt need an id to vote....you should have teeth.

 

[tsmith7559]

it appears you guys think the south is all redneck whites??? you might want to check the demographics on that.
black population
LA: 32%
GA:31%
MISS:37%
SC:28%
ALA: 27%

Last time I checked the black's support for
obama exceed 95%.

for Victors...black population in Mass 7.8%...no surpirse, another dumb post by Victors...GO #16!!!!

 

[byco42]

I've never experienced as diverse an ethnic culture as here in Charlotte.

 

[JScottWriter]

I will be in Charlotte at the end of the month, I will see if you are right.

 

[Michchamp]

I've never experienced as diverse an ethnic culture as here in Charlotte.

lots of rednecks from different redneck tribes?

I've heard that Jeff Gordon supporters are a lot different than Dale Earnhart Jr. supporters.