Only to a bunch of AR officionados. Federal employees pay taxes so her map of numbers still applies.

Really. You don't think that pointing out that She considers the bureaucrats in Washington DC to be producers is refuting her?

I saw that.

db made a comment on the article.

I agree. My post up above said something similar.

Stop bitching and start refuting. Show how she is wrong. I read her thing,and don't believe it, and on the surface it still looks pretty convincing.

Where did you see what's "in" or "out"?

Oh I don't know. I don't see a lot of people on here reasoning with her at all. Or actually refuting her which would be better.

I suspect there are several factors taht would allow a complete redrawing of the map:

1. Population - some of these things are probably related to economy of scale as costs are spread more thinly in more populous states and the more populous states tend to be blue states.
2. Military Pensions - I'm not sure this would have a big impact but should probably be removed from the equation.
3. VA benefits - depending on the benefits of course this should probably be removed from the equation.
4. Money spent to maintain federal lands should not be a "benefit" counted to western states that have had much of their land taken by the federal government.

I'm betting that if we made a chart and took the top XX number of cities in the US by population. And compared benefits received in those cities using this type of comparison - the result would be very different. And following the Pareto principle there would probably be very few cities needed to get a sizeable percentage of the US population accounted for.

The Washington DC area is very urban and you would be hard pressed to find any producers.

It is true that high population urban areas have many "producers". It has always been that way. What the author leaves out is those same areas have an abundance of "parasites": illegal immigrants, persons on welfare, many criminals, etc. Most of these urban parasites vote Democrat for what they can get. Thus making the state "blue".

If you spread out defense spending by population, I wonder if any state doesn't get back more tax dollars than they put in. How could anyone imagine that it is sustainable, let alone make an argument for continuing to spend more than we collect. What a load of distorted crap. A map that clearly demonstrates impending fiscal disaster used as evidence that a party that wants to spend more is "better"?

Well, it was written by the NYT after all. Pretty much ignore anything that comes out of that leftist fishwrapper.

This is totally a bunch of BS... there simply not enough "donor" states is to cover the greater than $1.00 (the bulk) of the states. California alone, with 40 million people and the 8th largest economy in the world would be rather impossible for the few small donor states indicated to subsidize.

If this isn't a complete lie - it may be taking into account long-term infrastructure bonds (spent in a single year but repaid over 50 years or something), and other considerations like that - which would be a very skewed representation. Small states in the midwest simply don't have much for highways and infrastructure (nor the need for them) compared to Los Angeles, San Diego, San Francisco, New York, etc.

The thought that Virginia doesn't take in more federal dollars than it pays in is completely ludicrous... ever driven up the BWI corridor?

Their corrupt rationale is taking up space on earth. Would we miss them? Would we miss leaches? Hell, no!

Keep up the good work.

Is it my imagination? Does this woman sound like a 35 year old adult child threatening to move out of my basement?

You are not reading my post - I GET IT - I have as much of a problem with it as you guys! Go read, I complain about those items!

You are absolutely correct - why I am trying to say is that if INDIVIDUAL accounts were set up, then all the money in that account would be mine AND my heirs. Now, after I pass - who gets it? - The illegals who never paid in one dime or my family?? How about secure accounts, minimum interest (T-Notes) and the right to pass the balance on to my family!

Fine. Let blue states secede and form their own collectivist paradise.

You were forced into the program along with all the other taxes you paid, and the program is still supported by a majority of people, including those paying taxes for it. There is no reason why you should sacrifice yourself and not get back whatever you can. It doesn't have to be the same pieces of paper dollar bills; it's the same system spanning your entire life.

This is more important than many may realize. The whole scam is based on lumping people into classes by state regardless of who they are, what they have done, what any of it has to do with whether the state is statist red or blue, how the money was earned versus welfare, etc.

Greetings tragicview.
That certainly was a tragic view!
Wow, so much wrong it hurt to read...
Rubbish...
Thank's... I think. :)
Respectfully,
O.A.

Had to read it twice. I'm still blinking in disbelief. It's too frightening to read a third time.