Pennsylvania is the only state that is even. How about that?
I live in a big time moocher state.
Ooh, more flounder.
DoctorBlade wrote: Ooh, more flounder.
I am not sure how that is a flounder....
Not a flounder if the topic is political in nature. Can't really flounder a topic on the first post.
Now, if the thread was about how much boost a stock Miata bottom end can take, then the first post would be a flounder.
Old data. I'd like to see where things stand now.
PA resident here. I feel so well balanced...yet my wallet feels so light.
Hurricane Katrina kinda skewed Louisiana (and Mississippi)... I wonder what percentage of that is solely related to Katrina. Yes, it was that big of an impact...
That's curious about OK, since we are one of the few states that produces more than the amount of oil/gas we use.
Surprised to see Montana up on the scale.
In reply to Appleseed:
My wild guess with states like Montana is that they have miles and miles of interstates and such but not lots of taxpayers. But the interstates benefit anyone going through the state, not just the residents. Same thing with New Mexico.
Montana, North Dakota and Maine all have hundreds of miles of roads that see a handful of vehicles a day. Worse yet, most of those vehicles are commercial trucks. Commercial trucks are hard on roads. Especially hard when they are carrying raw materials. The majority
Beat up road - no population to tax = federal deficient
Boy, us Minnesotans are pretty generous... :P
I would think that North Dakota should be turning in the other direction soon with the "oil boom" there.
Otto Maddox wrote:
I would like to see VA and MD adjusted for government employees.
The concept presented in this chart is guaranteed to incite, but glosses over the fact that spending within a state does not only benefit those living in the state. In the case of Maine for example, let's see this data once we add in the incomes of all of the property owners. Most full time residents here are poor, and pay little taxes, but the people clogging up our roads all summer and necessitating most of the capacity expansion that we need are the wealthy owners of vacation property who pay their income taxes in other states.
I can see NJ being where it is.. almost everything that comes by ship to the east coast seems to come through NJ.
That and we have a billion people per square metre up north
Where'd you find this and does more current data exist? Many times info like this isn't available quickly.
NY, #6 in percentage, nearly $1 trillion contribution.
Your welcome for the money, now quit bitching.
BTW, what is up with NM?
Otto Maddox wrote: In reply to Appleseed: My wild guess with states like Montana is that they have miles and miles of interstates and such but not lots of taxpayers. But the interstates benefit anyone going through the state, not just the residents. Same thing with New Mexico.
Right. Infrastructure benefits everyone. That's why mostly-rural areas are almost always "net losses", whereas tightly crammed areas are not. There was an article a little while back about a small town in Ohio that was probably going to be dis-incorporated because it depended about as much on state funding as on local revenue. And we have a governor who is all about cutting spending. THANKFULLY, so far, he's not going to be privatizing any roads, and he's all for conserving Lake Erie instead of selling water to the highest bidder.
Infrastructure is muscle mass.
Now, what I'm curious to see, is a comparison with the states' percentage of the national unemployment.
neon4891 wrote: BTW, what is up with NM?
I was going to joke and say "black military projects", but that's probably not far from the truth. Area 51 is in Nevada but there's a whole lot of other stuff going on in New Mexico, no?
Lots of people on the Federal Dole in NM as well.
ThePhranc wrote: I would like to see VA and MD adjusted for government employees.
How did MD get stuck with including DC in its figures? I say we should give it to VA.
You'll need to log in to post.
