_portrait.jpg){kind=link}
371
'Let the squealing begin': Ex-GOP chair warns DOGE cuts to hit red states more than blue
(www.rawstory.com)
this post was submitted on 22 Jan 2025
371 points (98.9% liked)
Leopards Ate My Face
3824 readers
882 users here now
Rules:
- If you don't already have some understanding of what this is, try reading this post. Off-topic posts will be removed.
- Please use a high-quality source to explain why your post fits if you think it might not be common knowledge and isn't explained within the post itself.
- Links to articles should be high-quality sources – for example, not the Daily Mail, the New York Post, Newsweek, etc. For a rough idea, check out this list. If it's marked in red, it probably isn't allowed; if it's yellow, exercise caution.
- The mods are fallible; if you've been banned or had a comment removed, you're encouraged to appeal it.
- For accessibility reasons, an image of text must either have alt text or a transcription in the comments.
- All Lemmy.World Terms of Service apply.
Also feel free to check out [email protected] (also active).
Icon credit C. Brück on Wikimedia Commons.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
No shit. For all their railing against taxes and entitlements, Red states overwhelmingly benefit from them while Blue states largely fund them. 4 of the top 5 most dependent states are Red (Alaska, West Virginia, Mississippi, and Montana). And 4 of the top 5 least dependent states are Blue (Minnesota, New Jersey, Delaware, and Illinois). They are shooting themselves in the foot, as always.
Source: https://smartasset.com/data-studies/states-most-dependent-federal-government-2023
Interesting link and based on it every single state but New Mexico is paying in more than they are getting out, meaning that 49 of the 50 are carrying their own water. What the high contribution states like Minnesota are really paying for is all of the other stuff that the Federal Government does.
There are always administrative costs that drain a portion of the revenue. It's unavoidable. However, the losses to administrative costs would be significantly higher for each state were they to replace them with state-run alternatives. Particularly in those states where the services are in highest demand. Right now, West Virginia only gets back a dollar for every $1.04 spent, yes. That may seem like it would be in their interest to omit themselves from federal taxes and services. But then they would either have to replace those services themselves or leave their citizens without. Were they to replace the federal services themselves, that $1.04 would almost certainly be higher, potentially multiple times higher. And were they to leave their citizens without, people leave, turn to crime or die.