Comments on: AMERICA'S WELFARE QUEENS

By: I’m a welfare queen!! The irony! « Courtney’s Blog

I’m a welfare queen!! The irony! « Courtney’s Blog — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 16:25:22 +0000

[...] via ginandtacos.com Â» Blog Archive Â» AMERICAâ€™S WELFARE QUEENS. [...]

By: ginandtacos.com » Blog Archive » THE NUMBERS RACKET

ginandtacos.com » Blog Archive » THE NUMBERS RACKET — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 04:23:38 +0000

[...] riddled with holes and – coincidentally, I'm sure – tilts the process in favor of the Welfare Queen States of red America. Share and [...]

By: Cate

Cate — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 22:56:53 +0000

Can I see this date minus the Federal spending on Interstate Highways and Military Spending?

By: fairlane

fairlane — Wed, 29 Oct 2008 22:15:09 +0000

Nice article.

A few points.

Although it's true that many of these states have Democratic Congress', in rural America, Democrats are virtually indistinguishable from Republicans. They tend to be cut from the same hyper-religious, "Pro-Life," and no new taxes mold.

Second, when you compare the rural parts of these states to the metropolitan areas, you see the same disparity. The cities, where all the "godless liberals" reside, pay the majority of the state's taxes.

Third, public education, Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security, etc are all "Socialist" programs. Obviously, the poor tend to depend on these "Socialist" services more than anyone else. In fact, in some counties here in Kentucky, 70-80% of the residents are on some kind of state or federally financed insurance program.

The response I've received when I bring this up is, tepid. Republicans, per usual, blame everything on the Democrats. One guy told me, "I'd give back the money if I could." Which is absurd, of course. His town couldn't keep the fire house open without that money because they have no tax base (23% unemployment).

The truth is, this isn't really about "Socialism," as much as it's about "Racism."

When a Wingnut says "Socialism," he/she means "Welfare," which implies "Black person" living in the "Inner City."

By: wufnik

wufnik — Wed, 29 Oct 2008 18:29:38 +0000

I blogged aobut this a couple of years ago, here:
http://bazzfazz.blogspot.com/2004/11/red-state-blue-state.html
it was just after the 2004 elections, and I was pissed.
Check out an outfit called the Tax Foundation–they track this stuff pretty closely. Personally, I'm in favor of a constitutional amendment prohibiting states from receiving more federal dollars than they contribute.

By: Al C

Al C — Thu, 15 May 2008 19:42:06 +0000

The infrastructure that made the "New South" possible came from other people's taxes. I'm not very popular when I point that out to anti-tax conservatives here in Dixie.

By: EP3

EP3 — Wed, 14 May 2008 20:07:48 +0000

I would like to go one step further and ask, which of these top beneficiaries states, which ones are also coincidently having economies that are doing better than others? Here in Michigan, our economy sucks and we give more than we get back. Yet in Alabama, they get back more and their economy is doing quite well, and their cost of living is much lower.

I am personally sick of hearing about "welfare queens living off the gov't". I read a book that listed corporate welfare amounted to over $1 trillion in lost tax revenue each year. Cut that stuff out and then I am willing to discuss cutting "welfare queens" off the gov't payrolls.

By: Shade Tail

Shade Tail — Wed, 14 May 2008 17:25:25 +0000

This could be a great weapon against the republicans, but we need to find a way to actually spread the word. The problem is that those voters you're writing about, middle country, low-income, low-information, tend to be republican, etc., have only one or two sources of info, and neither of them are the internet. More often than not, they get a couple tv channels, and maybe a single newspaper if they're lucky, all owned by republicans naturally.

So this is all fine and well, but it isn't enough to just talk about it among ourselves. We have to find a way to tell *them* about this.

By: David Fetter

David Fetter — Wed, 14 May 2008 16:36:07 +0000

Did you count the tax subsidies mislabeled as "breaks" or "cuts?" If so, how? I strongly suspect that those subsidies would make the red/blue divide even larger if they're not already taken into account.