Time to buy property in Texas.
Speaking of stimulus dollars…
Of the handful of governors who refused some of the stimulus (my gov is on that list), I don’t recall seeing Gov. Perry’s name.
Kind of hard to declare your independence while still sucking off of the tit, isn’t it?
If a state can be completely self supporting and not take federal tax dollars at all then I say go for it. I argue that it would be too difficult to become their own country. Texas, and any other state, gets lots of my tax dollars.
Really, if NH or Kansas wants to be their own country, go for it.
Of the countries you named, only Australia and New Zealand were ranked as economically freer than the US–and I certainly wouldn’t regard either of them as hotbeds of “socialism.”
Have you been there? I have. High taxes, high import tariffs, universal benefits, etc. Same for most European countries.
And once again, if socialism equated to economic freedom, then according to the list North Korea, Zimbabwe, and Cuba would be the three most “capitalist” countries in the world–lol.
Who said that socialism equated to economic freedom? I’m only pointing out that socialism and economic freedom (and prosperity) are obviously not exclusive. It is quite easy to screw up any political or economic system… usually via corruption. Take a look at all the countries that are capitalist (or at any rate certainly not socialist) which are also very poor.
If a state can be completely self supporting and not take federal tax dollars at all then I say go for it. I argue that it would be too difficult to become their own country. Texas, and any other state, gets lots of my tax dollars.
Really, if NH or Kansas wants to be their own country, go for it.
I think Hawaii has been angling for this. They probably have enough tourist income to pull it off. TX and AK have the oil revenue so, again, may be possible. However, this only addresses the money side. These states-turned-countries would need to consider trade, border crossing, military, etc.
I think you were joking about KS but if it did (snowball’s chance in Hell) then it would become the 2nd country to reside completely within another.
jen, the federal dollars coming into texas (via programs, benefits, etc.) is less than what goes out via our federal income taxes. Texas is a net exporter of funding to Washington and helps subsidize other states.
Yeah, Kansas was a joke. I was trying to illustrate I wasn’t just saying this about Texas.
I was also thinking of infrastructure such as highways and schools that they get federal funds to maintain. I think we’d be surprised to see how much federal money is pumped into any state and how much it would affect the state if that source disappeared. Think about state income taxes and double it, if not more.
Think about state income taxes and double it, if not more.
What he is saying is that they get taxed more than they got back now… so theoretically they’d be better off. This isn’t unusual… I’d expect that around half the states are in this situation. Is there a chart somewhere?
He posted as I was posting so I didn’t see his post 
It would be interesting to see the out vs. in on tax dollars. If more goes out then yup, they could be totally self supporting.
It would be interesting to see the out vs. in on tax dollars. If more goes out then yup, they could be totally self supporting.
http://www.nemw.org/fundsrank.htm
As of 2005, Texas is the least revenue-negative (paid more than they received) state. 33 states were revenue-positive. Wanna guess how many red states were revenue-positive, and how many of the revenue-negative states were blue states? Hint: of the 17 states that received less federal revenue per capita than they paid in federal taxes, the worst-off 16 voted for Obama. Of the 20 most socialist states, 15 voted for McCain.
Oh yeah, for only the second time in almost half a century, more people think they pay about the right amount of taxes than think they pay too much:
***Oh yeah, for only the second time in almost half a century, more people think they pay about the right amount of taxes than think they pay too much: ***
Hmmmmm, I wonder if that could be because of the large % of people that pay little or no federal taxes at all? I suspect most of them think that “nothing” is juuuuusssst right.
Let’s see, if we can get to the point where 10% of the people pay all of the taxes, then we’ll be able to say that 90% of the people are happy with the amount they (don’t) pay…sure seems like a valid statistic to me.
You think those who make > $75,000 pay little or no taxes? Must be, else how to explain why 44% of them think their taxes are “about right”?
So from what I read on how to interpret the data on the site you linked to is that any state that has a ranking below 1 is negative ROI with federal tax dollars. If so, my state isn’t getting a good ROI! Dammit.
Highest ROI -
Mississippi
New Mexico
Louisiana
Alaska
West Virginia
North Dakota
Alabama
Virginia
Kentucky
North Dakota
Rhode Island is the closest to breaking even.
Nice try, but your statistic was one of *comparison *between those that think they pay too much and those that think they pay the right amount, not about the breakdown within each income bracket. Apples and Oranges, as you well know.
It is interesting to note however that your chart shows that nearly 40% of those that likely pay little or no federal taxes at all (under $30k income) still think that they pay too much. Of course that’s changed in the last year, likely as a result of having the total tax burden pushed even further up the income ladder.
It’s also worth noting that the data is somewhat skewed when you lump together $75k and higher into the top tier. A family with a joint income in the $75k range isn’t likely to be paying all that much in federal taxes either…maybe a 15% effective rate as a guess…maybe less? If I paid a 15% effective rate, I’d be pretty satisfied too.
Hmmmmm, I wonder if that could be because of the large % of people that pay little or no federal taxes at all? I suspect most of them think that “nothing” is juuuuusssst right.
So do you think a family with under $30k in income should pay a lot of income tax?
This is federal income tax you are looking at. I didn’t have to pay property tax until I bought property, and it doesn’t make a lot of sense for people with little income to pay much income tax. There are plenty of other taxes that people who make very little money still have to pay.
***So do you think a family with under $30k in income should pay a lot of income tax? ***
I never said that, did I? I simply said that when you pay little or no tax, you likely think that it’s the right amount.
***There are plenty of other taxes that people who make very little money still have to pay. **** ***
I absolutely agree…and President Obama, along with the help of Congress will be raising them all.
Speaking of stimulus dollars…
Of the handful of governors who refused some of the stimulus (my gov is on that list), I don’t recall seeing Gov. Perry’s name.
Kind of hard to declare your independence while still sucking off of the tit, isn’t it?
Actually, Perry did reject quite a bit of stimulus money. Certainly not all of it, but I know there was a huge push to accept a bunch of stimulus money to fund an extension of the Unemployment Insurance program here. Perry said no because it funded the extension for only a year or two and obligated Texas to continue the extension in perpetuity at the State’s expense after that.
On the other hand, Perry did accept a ton of stimulus money to expand programs in Texas Schools. The only stipulation was that it could not be used to fund personnel . . . . so we got a shitload of money to create new programs with, but no way to pay people to actually RUN the programs. Pure genius!
however, for the poor, an environment has been created where the effective marginal tax rate is in excess of 100% if they decide to go get a job–or to get a better job. talk about a disincentive to attempt to improve one’s self. our existing tax code is repressive against the poor in that they do not have any short term incentive to work harder to get out of poverty. if the financial incentive is there, then additional hard-work, eduction, and desire will create a drive to achieve prosperity.
" High taxes, high import tariffs, universal benefits, etc."
**
If you go to the “Top Ten” list compiled by the scholars who developed the index and listing, you’ll find that Australia and New Zealand received almost identical rankings in “trade freedom” (i. e., tariffs) compared with the US. As to the taxes and benefits, you can look at the “government size” factor. Here New Zealand received a somewhat lower ranking (i. e., larger government size) than the US, but Australia received a higher ranking than the US. So even if you want to single out these two countries, they don’t support your claim; at best, they are ambiguous.
**
“Same for most European countries.”
Yes, of course. That’s why they rank much lower in economic freedom than the US. The evidence of that ranking, as shown by the overwhelming majority of the countries, strongly refutes your claim.
“Take a look at all the countries that are capitalist (or at any rate certainly not socialist) which are also very poor.”
Again, the evidence of the ranking goes strongly against your claim. The very poor countries are almost entirely the ones near the bottom of the list, that is, the least capitalist ones with the least economic freedom.
Actually, Perry did reject quite a bit of stimulus money. Certainly not all of it, but I know there was a huge push to accept a bunch of stimulus money to fund an extension of the Unemployment Insurance program here. Perry said no because it funded the extension for only a year or two and obligated Texas to continue the extension in perpetuity at the State’s expense after that.
Ok, good to know. Gov. Sanford gave similar reasons for not accepting all of the stimulus. He wanted to use a portion to pay down debt but was told “no”. It’s to be used for education/teacher salaries. As with TX, the money would only pay for 2 years of salaries and SC would then be on the hook from then on. At that point, we (SC) would not only have to come up with more money to continue the salaries, but would still be making the interest payments on the debt.