http://money.cnn.com/news/storysupplement/economy/state_debt/index.html
Is anyone surprised by these numbers?
Edited, Aug 3rd 2010 4:38pm by knoxxsouthy
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- State Dept Per Capita
State Dept Per CapitaFollow
Quote:
"The stimulus package has really offset what might have been significantly more debt issuance
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
Good luck issuing bonds until interest rates start climbing. Right now the interest is pretty much like a savings account.
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
Xarus,
The stimulus just created more debt for US citizens. And unemployment is over 9% for the second straight year for the first time since the 30's. Change you can believe in.
The stimulus just created more debt for US citizens. And unemployment is over 9% for the second straight year for the first time since the 30's. Change you can believe in.
I watched the Russell Simmons Visionaries video instead of reading the article.
Anyone surprised that the most liberal areas are the states that have the heaviest burden?
Joph where are you to explain away the bums in IL?
Joph where are you to explain away the bums in IL?
Not surprised at all, because many red states get lots of pork from the Feds, in the form of road construction projects and Pentagon contracts.
The data doesn't quite jive up between the two different articles, but let's not pretend that red states like Alaska are totally fiscally responsible when they're getting back $2 for every dollar they pay in federal taxes, and yet they still have a significant per capita debt.
Quote:
Research by the Tax Foundation casts the state-by-state contrasts in a different light, looking at what states get back relative to the tax dollars they send to Washington. In a 2007 study (drawing on data from 2005) the Tax Foundation found that New Mexico ranked first, with residents getting back $2 in spending for every $1 they paid in federal taxes. The next leading states were Mississippi, Alaska, Louisiana, and West Virginia. At the bottom of the list were New Jersey (residents got 61 cents for every dollar of taxes), Nevada, Connecticut, New Hampshire, and Minnesota.
The data doesn't quite jive up between the two different articles, but let's not pretend that red states like Alaska are totally fiscally responsible when they're getting back $2 for every dollar they pay in federal taxes, and yet they still have a significant per capita debt.
knoxxsouthy wrote:
Joph where are you to explain away the bums in IL?
Explain what? Overall tax income is down due to the recession and so the state is borrowing more.
Despite that, I voted for "the other guy" in the Democratic governor's primary. Quinn's a lot better than Blagojevich (damned with faint praise) but not exactly a governing luminary.
I was a little surprised by your article since I was expecting something on the State Department.
Edited, Aug 3rd 2010 4:14pm by Jophiel
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
In defense, my state is currently being run by a blind moron and no one wants to work with him.
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
knoxxsouthy wrote:
Anyone surprised that the most liberal areas are the states that have the heaviest burden?
Example: Oregon is probably more liberal than Washington. Washington has 20% more debt burden than Oregon.
Oh God! Not this again...
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
There are not many times I agree with Gbaji. This is one of them.
Just as Planned.
State Department per capita...?
Belkira the Tulip wrote:
State Department per capita...?
This.
Omg a typo.
Doesn't change the fact that liberal states are borrowing more, by far, than conservative states.
This goes against everything Jophed has been saying for years now.
Doesn't change the fact that liberal states are borrowing more, by far, than conservative states.
This goes against everything Jophed has been saying for years now.
knoxxsouthy wrote:
This goes against everything Jophed has been saying for years now.
No, it doesn't. I means that you haven't understood what was said earlier but that's no surprise.
The earlier argument was that red states received more money from the federal government than they sent to DC and blue states tended to send more money to DC than they ever got back.
This article says that (broadly speaking) blue states are deeper in state debt than red states.
An analogy combining the two would be that blue states are wealthier people who pay a lot of taxes and have large credit card debts while red states have no credit card debt, pay no taxes and are living off welfare.
If there's an easy fix to this, it would be to cut the red states off the Federal teat and let the blue states take their excess federal payments and pay down their debt with it.
Edited, Aug 4th 2010 11:03am by Jophiel
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
knoxxsouthy wrote:
Omg a typo.
I was just teasing.
Jophed,
Edited, Aug 4th 2010 12:27pm by knoxxsouthy
Quote:
If there's an easy fix to this, it would be to cut the red states off the Federal teat and let the blue states take their excess federal payments and pay down their debt with it.
Edited, Aug 4th 2010 12:27pm by knoxxsouthy
It is sort of funny how all the red states are poor, yes.
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
Yet the blue states borrow more federal money.
knoxxsouthy wrote:
Yet the blue states borrow more federal money.
Either 1. Varrus has me on ignore or 2. he completely skipped over my post or 3. he didn't understand what the article I linked to was talking about, nor did he comprehend what the paragraph I posted said.
So, I'll repost:
If New Jerseyites are paying $1 in taxes and only seeing 61 cents of those taxes returned to the state in the form of federal spending, it's no wonder that NJ is $4000 in debt for every person.
In contrast, it shows how fiscally irresponsible Alaska is that they get back $2 for every $1 they pay in taxes (e.g. they're on federal welfare), and yet they're still in debt over $1000 for every person.
So, I'll repost:
Quote:
Research by the Tax Foundation casts the state-by-state contrasts in a different light, looking at what states get back relative to the tax dollars they send to Washington.
In a 2007 study (drawing on data from 2005) the Tax Foundation found that New Mexico ranked first, with residents getting back $2 in spending for every $1 they paid in federal taxes. The next leading states were Mississippi, Alaska, Louisiana, and West Virginia.
At the bottom of the list were New Jersey (residents got 61 cents for every dollar of taxes), Nevada, Connecticut, New Hampshire, and Minnesota.
In a 2007 study (drawing on data from 2005) the Tax Foundation found that New Mexico ranked first, with residents getting back $2 in spending for every $1 they paid in federal taxes. The next leading states were Mississippi, Alaska, Louisiana, and West Virginia.
At the bottom of the list were New Jersey (residents got 61 cents for every dollar of taxes), Nevada, Connecticut, New Hampshire, and Minnesota.
If New Jerseyites are paying $1 in taxes and only seeing 61 cents of those taxes returned to the state in the form of federal spending, it's no wonder that NJ is $4000 in debt for every person.
In contrast, it shows how fiscally irresponsible Alaska is that they get back $2 for every $1 they pay in taxes (e.g. they're on federal welfare), and yet they're still in debt over $1000 for every person.
If I cared what varus said I might go and compare the actual numbers of dollars per capita that a state sends to the feds and doesn't get back vs the debt per capita, but he'll ignore it anyway, so why bother.
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
knoxxsouthy wrote:
Yet the blue states borrow more federal money.
No. States borrow money by selling bonds.
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
knoxxsouthy wrote:
Yet the blue states borrow more federal money.
Not according to the article you linked. According to that, they're borrowing money in the form of bonds. Borrowing from investors, in other words.
Edit: damn you, Joph!
Edited, Aug 4th 2010 10:00am by Samira
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
Recent Visitors: 191
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (191)
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- State Dept Per Capita
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC