This is interesting: according to a recent op-ed
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/30/opinion/30PINK.html?pagewanted=print&position=
in the New York Times, "Each year, the Tax Foundation, a nonprofit
research group, crunches numbers from the Census Bureau to produce an
intriguing figure: how much each state receives in federal spending
for every dollar it pays in federal taxes."
These states are then classified as "Giver" or "Taker" states.
If on average a state's population pays more in federal taxes than it
receives in federal spending, it's a "Giver" state.
If the opposite is true, it's a "Taker" state (for example, for every
dollar the average North Dakotan paid in federal taxes last year, he
received $2.07 in federal benefits - North Dakota is a "Taker" state.
The average Minnesotan, on the other hand, received 77c for every
dollar he spent - so Minnesota is a "Giver" state).
But here's the kicker: the vast majority of "Taker" states are - you
guessed it - states that went for George W. Bush in 2000.
(Bush got 78% of his electoral votes from "Taker" states.)
And the vast majority of "Giver" states went for Al Gore.
(Gore got 76% of his electoral votes from "Giver" states.)
So what does this mean?
Well, it means that despite what Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, Bill
O'Reilly and the rest of the right-wing spin machine tells you,
Republicans are not constantly under attack from the federal
government which wants to take their money and distribute it to lazy
shiftless liberals.
In fact the opposite is true - the constituents of the red states are
living off the tax dollars of those who live in the blue states.
But since the Republican Congress decides where all that tax money
goes, there's not much we can do about it.
Bummer eh?
From The Democratic Underground
http://www.democraticunderground.com/
Harry
.
|
