Posted on 02/12/2005 7:56:43 PM PST by NormsRevenge
According to the study, California ranked 45th out of the 50 states, plus the District of Columbia.
New Jersey fared the worst, receiving 58 cents back on the dollar, while New Mexico gets $2 in return for every dollar paid to the feds.
But, but, but, some politicians are calling the Federal Budget "austere." I can't imagine for a moment that California would be "shortchanged."
Remove the SS money from this picture to remove the affect of 'snowbirds' moving to inexpensive places and you get a more realistic picture (the fact that SS is a transfer tax from the young and relatively poor to the old and rich is another question entirely).
CA would still be a doner, but the statistics would be less impressive.
But I thought Jane Fonda and her friends love to pay hight tax rates.
the fed .gov is picking everyone's pockets.
Surely this scumbag, Schiff, realizes that California has voted against Bush twice?
And that California keeps sending a couple of scumbag Senators back to Washington to vote against GOP initiatives and berate Bush's nominees? Whatever money gets sent back to California better stay in Republican districts....
90% of statistics posted on the 'net are simply made up.
Yeah, I thought the "Progressives" would LOVE this, wouldn't they? After all, Washington DC is just "taxing the rich" as far as states are concerned, & California is a rich state, not a poor state like New Mexico or Mississippi.
The feds are doing just what that bank robber said: they are going "to where the money is". Sounds only fair, doesn't it?
They want to keep more of their money? Quit sending it to Washington DC and quit electing creatures that like to raise taxes.
They ripped up the constitution a long time and only use the parts they like . Rights are an illusion.
AMEN TO THAT!!!! Rarely do I hear my other FReepers mention this fact as succinctly as you did...but then again, many of these same unconstitutional federal programs go to help them out personally (or their state or Congressional District), so that is why this issue is swept under the rug like it is.
Few people here have the guts to call it like it is, so I appreciate you for pointing this out.
Same here. I thought that they wanted the rich to may more of a percentage than they have under Bush. Since the median price of a home in Claifornia is $465,540 and the median price of a home in New Mexico is $129,400 and in Mississippi $95,600, California is clearly the richer state by far. Why shouldn't they pay more?
Remove the SS money from this picture to remove the affect of 'snowbirds' moving to inexpensive places and you get a more realistic picture (the fact that SS is a transfer tax from the young and relatively poor to the old and rich is another question entirely).
Good of you to catch the SS angle. Another thing that I bet is wrong with this study is that it is per capita and does not take into consideration the "overhead" of the Federal government, which is going to fall more on less populated states (more interstates and military bases per capita). Remove that, an I am not at all sure that California is a "doner" state.
Only in someone's dreams would states get back all the money that they send to Washington. What do you think pays for all the DC bureaucrats and those fancy buildings they work in? It has to be skimmed off from the money they get. The states only get back what's left. Which is yet another good argument for cutting taxes and letting the citizens of the states keep the money in the first place. If CA wants 100% of its tax dollars to go to CA purposes, don't send it thru DC, tax it here (where it's also a lot more convenient for me to wrap my hands around a local politician's neck for raising my taxes).
I looked through 25 lists of think tanks based in and around washington and none List anything called the California institute. is this a made up study to inflame the mistreated califas.
If every state got back a dollar for every dollar it sent to Washington for taxes, what would be the point of taxes (which is my point).
Eliminate "revenue sharing" !!
So what's the real purpose of the study anyway? To provide lazy CA legislators and a RINO Govenor an excuse not to control spending or tackle the issues. So they go to Washington with hat in hand, letting all the problems that plague CA mushroom.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.