Monday, November 19, 2012
News Fuck These People
Posted by Dan Savage on Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 7:25 AM
The ranchers, businessmen and farmers across this deep-red state who knew, just knew that Americans would never re-elect a liberal tax-and-spender president have grudgingly accepted the reality that voters did just that. But since the election, a blanket of baffled worry has descended on conservatives here like early snow across the plains, deepening a sense that traditional, rural and overwhelmingly white states in the center of the country are losing touch with an increasingly diverse and urban American electorate. “It’s a fundamental shift,” said Khale Lenhart, 27, a lawyer here. “It’s a mind-set change—that government is here to take care of me.” ... Bradley Harrington, who publishes a year-old conservative newspaper called Liberty’s Torch and is the host of a radio talk show in Cheyenne, said the election vindicated conservative politicians and commentators who talked about the 47 percent of Americans who pay no income tax, about makers and takers. “The parasites now outnumber the producers,” Mr. Harrington said. “That’s why Romney lost, and I think it’s going to get worse.”
Rural and overwhelmingly white states like Wyoming get more in federal money than they pay in taxes. Mother Jones:
A look at 2010 Census and IRS data reveals that the 50 states and the District of Columbia, on average, received $1.29 in federal spending for every federal tax dollar they paid. That means that some states are getting a lot more than they put in, and vice versa. The states that contributed more in taxes than they got back in spending were more likely to have voted for Obama in 2008 and were more likely to be largely urban.... Red states were more likely to get a bigger cut of federal spending. Of the 22 states that went to McCain in 2008, 86 percent received more federal spending than they paid in taxes in 2010. In contrast, 55 percent of the states that went to Obama received more federal spending than they paid in taxes. Republican states, on average, received $1.46 in federal spending for every tax dollar paid; Democratic states, on average, received $1.16. This red-blue split may be partly explained by the difference between urban and rural states. Red states are more likely to be rural, and rural states were more likely to receive more federal spending than they paid in taxes in 2010. Among predominantly rural states, 81 percent received more federal spending than they paid in taxes. In contrast, 44 percent of urban states received more federal spending than they paid in taxes. Rural states, on average, received $1.40 in federal spending for every tax dollar paid; urban states, on average, received $1.10.
And the radio talk show hosts in Wyoming—which receives are $1.16 in federal spending for every $1 paid—have the nerve to point at blue states and complain about parasites and moochers?
1
I think that, if there is a theme to recent conservatism it is this: "Don't bother me with math......ever".
It would explain a great deal.
It would explain a great deal.
5
"... a blanket of baffled worry has descended on conservatives here like early snow across the plains ...". Sounds so pastoral and benign. Doesn't this reporter have an editor?
6
You've solved the budget problem! The moocher red states can all agree that they will take no more than they give starting Jan 1st. That should help balance the federal books.
7
The guy they interviewed -- his name is Khale? Khale?
And they call Williamsburg Hipsters pretentious with their baby names ...
And they call Williamsburg Hipsters pretentious with their baby names ...
8
@2: "your whining is music"
Yes, but yours is nonstop, maybe mommy and daddy (the grown-ups who pay your bills) should cut off the teat so you stop crying.
Yes, but yours is nonstop, maybe mommy and daddy (the grown-ups who pay your bills) should cut off the teat so you stop crying.
9
Their narrative can only exist in a world where the poors and coloreds are constantly attempting to overrun the gate into their shining white city on a hill, which actually never existed.
The conservative mindset can only exist if there is great fear from the masses, which they now call the "takers." So they HAVE to believe this fiction. It is not just that they want to belive it. They HAVE to.
The conservative mindset can only exist if there is great fear from the masses, which they now call the "takers." So they HAVE to believe this fiction. It is not just that they want to belive it. They HAVE to.
10
Hey Wyoming, those Interstate highways that gets you stuff in the middle of nowhere... you didn't build those.
11
The best business-minded report that someone could write in regards to this should be titled as such "Return of Investment for Feds in Blue States vs Red States".
That would catch my attention as well as the attention of those damn fiscal republicans who understand ROI
That would catch my attention as well as the attention of those damn fiscal republicans who understand ROI
12
This whole secession thing has all the maturity of a two-year-old throwing a temper tantrum. "If I can't have my way, I'm going to hold my breath until I die." You didn't see Democrats doing this crap when some really nasty Republicans got elected. (And oh, I hate to break it to you, but you can't secede. Deal with it.)
13
@ unregistered troll: I pay my own way, I pay taxes for my own government services, and I pay for some of yours, too. Those taxes benefit my neighbors, who I have to live with in this world, and to ungrateful shitheads like you, with whom I wish I didn't.
15
By the time the Israelites left Egypt after the plagues the Egyptians were so glad so see them go they showered them with gifts as they left.
So will be the departure of the Red States.
They will not have to secede.
You will beg them to leave, and shower them with Liberal Subsidies to hasten their exit....
So will be the departure of the Red States.
They will not have to secede.
You will beg them to leave, and shower them with Liberal Subsidies to hasten their exit....
16
@13 Can WE kick them out? Specifically, give the boot to North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, West Virginia, Kentucky, Alabama, Mississippi, Arkansas and Texas.
We'll keep Georgia and Florida as Alaska SE and Louisiana as Mardi Hawaii. Presumably most of the black people in the New Confederacy will self-deport to Atlanta, and the white people in Baton Rouge will spontaneously combust!
The best part would be we could continue to torture the right-wing nuts in Colorado Springs, Arizona, Utah, Wyoming, Idaho and the upper Midwest, who will then be hopelessly outnumbered, even in the Senate!
I suppose it would mean the end to my vague plans to someday buy an AK to play with...but worth it to watch Texas have an intramural fight between the Oil Biznezz and the Teahadists wanting to ban exports to the Yankees.
We'll keep Georgia and Florida as Alaska SE and Louisiana as Mardi Hawaii. Presumably most of the black people in the New Confederacy will self-deport to Atlanta, and the white people in Baton Rouge will spontaneously combust!
The best part would be we could continue to torture the right-wing nuts in Colorado Springs, Arizona, Utah, Wyoming, Idaho and the upper Midwest, who will then be hopelessly outnumbered, even in the Senate!
I suppose it would mean the end to my vague plans to someday buy an AK to play with...but worth it to watch Texas have an intramural fight between the Oil Biznezz and the Teahadists wanting to ban exports to the Yankees.
21
@15: "You will beg them to leave, and shower them with Liberal Subsidies to hasten their exit...."
We've already been doing that, troll. Learn to read.
We've already been doing that, troll. Learn to read.
22
These kinds of discussions involving arbitrary geographical boundaries sauteed with in socioeconomic, demographic, and political assumptions and then seasoned with hyperbole and stereotypes is not very appetizing.
23
@7
Making up novel baby names is something all humans do.
One of the things that sucks about the Internet is that it lets shut-ins peer out of their isolation and spew uninformed nonsense based on their blinkered worldview.
Making up novel baby names is something all humans do.
One of the things that sucks about the Internet is that it lets shut-ins peer out of their isolation and spew uninformed nonsense based on their blinkered worldview.
24
@ScrawnyKayaker, you left the drug cartels out of your Texas intramurals. They'd LOVE to move in, and they've got the money -- and weaponry -- to subsidize it.
27
@24 Muggle, please. The Texas Rangers and all those manly men who frequently use the phrase "it's the perfect home defense weapon" will turn back the narcos without much trouble. Remember the Alamo?
Oh, wait. Everyone at the Alamo died.
Oh, wait. Everyone at the Alamo died.
28
While I totally agree with this point - folks in red states seem to be patently unaware of the flow of federal money toward their localities - this fact does not exactly rebut what they are claiming (which is and always has been a abstract challenge of idealism and character rather than data, since something like that can never be refuted)
At the risk of coming off as a concern troll, I think when conservatives are talking about the "welfare mindset", they are literally talking about individuals who claim government benefits (and projecting this as "enabling folks to be lazy") and if you look at red states vs. blue states strictly in terms of welfare recipients per capita, blue states DO currently have more folks on the roles right now (though not by a particularly statistically significant degree - http://goo.gl/TrNsk).
And while the data above are definitely good to throw into an argument for perspective, so people can see this from a "real federal dollar" lens, it might also be good to include, so they don't think you're ignoring their "point" entirely:
1) The correlations you're alluding to are not very strong, and
2) 47% is not a majority.
At the risk of coming off as a concern troll, I think when conservatives are talking about the "welfare mindset", they are literally talking about individuals who claim government benefits (and projecting this as "enabling folks to be lazy") and if you look at red states vs. blue states strictly in terms of welfare recipients per capita, blue states DO currently have more folks on the roles right now (though not by a particularly statistically significant degree - http://goo.gl/TrNsk).
And while the data above are definitely good to throw into an argument for perspective, so people can see this from a "real federal dollar" lens, it might also be good to include, so they don't think you're ignoring their "point" entirely:
1) The correlations you're alluding to are not very strong, and
2) 47% is not a majority.
29
provincial isolation from the mass of americans and their economic struggles allows them to believe their own bullshit.
the government damn well should be there to help me if i need it, especially when i give them 25% of my income. not just kill brown people who look at us sideways.
the government damn well should be there to help me if i need it, especially when i give them 25% of my income. not just kill brown people who look at us sideways.
32
You're incorrect in assuming the people who complain about government spending are the same people who benefit the most from government spending.
The government subsidies in the debtor states aren't distributed equally.
I, for example, would have a right to complain if I paid a lot more in taxes than I benefited, even if I paid those taxes in a state that overall benefits from tax distribution. If I were one of a few tax contributors in a sea of tax benefiters, I would have even more cause to complain.
Celebrate our victory, but don't pretend opponents aren't entirely without cause.
The government subsidies in the debtor states aren't distributed equally.
I, for example, would have a right to complain if I paid a lot more in taxes than I benefited, even if I paid those taxes in a state that overall benefits from tax distribution. If I were one of a few tax contributors in a sea of tax benefiters, I would have even more cause to complain.
Celebrate our victory, but don't pretend opponents aren't entirely without cause.
33
What everyone hears fails to see is that the folks in the red states do not have a community identity. They are rugged individualists who believe in personal responsibility. They do not believe in communal responsibility.
Consequently, so long as they PERSONALLY pay taxes, they regard themselves as makers. The fact that their state, as a whole, is a net taker simply is not germaine to them.
Of course, they also fail to realize that their states are the ones with the greatest proportion of citizens who do not pay federal income taxes. Or maybe they do. Maybe it is the frequent daily contact with non-taxpayers that has fostered their indignation.
Consequently, so long as they PERSONALLY pay taxes, they regard themselves as makers. The fact that their state, as a whole, is a net taker simply is not germaine to them.
Of course, they also fail to realize that their states are the ones with the greatest proportion of citizens who do not pay federal income taxes. Or maybe they do. Maybe it is the frequent daily contact with non-taxpayers that has fostered their indignation.
34
or maybe they like feeling like kings among the scrabble and now worry the scrabble might rise up.
Maybe it is the frequent daily contact with non-taxpayers that has fostered their indignation.
or maybe they like feeling like kings among the scrabble and now worry the scrabble might rise up.
35
I'd be interested to see how much of the government largesse directed to red states consists of military spending; I think a lot of folks in those states would not consider that gummint money, but rather, getting paid for being patriotic.
In short, what they mean by "government spending" is, money that goes to someone else.
In short, what they mean by "government spending" is, money that goes to someone else.
36
These red-staters complaining about moochers, and the folks noting their counter-argument: Let's talk about farm subsidies for a bit, and see how that tips the scales.
37
@35,
Given that red states are mostly rural, I would guess most of the spending is: roads, agricultural subsidies, rural electrification and other infrastructure they would never get in the totally free market (because delivering mail, phone service, and electricity to rural areas has poor ROI). And they don't pay much in return because those states are sparsely populated and not particularly wealthy.
Compared to what? Had it not been for Roosevelt's New Deal, much of that part of the country would be completely unpopulated. Those motherfuckers have no gratitude.
Given that red states are mostly rural, I would guess most of the spending is: roads, agricultural subsidies, rural electrification and other infrastructure they would never get in the totally free market (because delivering mail, phone service, and electricity to rural areas has poor ROI). And they don't pay much in return because those states are sparsely populated and not particularly wealthy.
“It’s a fundamental shift,” said Khale Lenhart, 27, a lawyer here. “It’s a mind-set change—that government is here to take care of me.”
Compared to what? Had it not been for Roosevelt's New Deal, much of that part of the country would be completely unpopulated. Those motherfuckers have no gratitude.
38
@28,
It's worth noting that many states (and I'll let you guess the political make up of those states) kick people off the welfare rolls and then use that *federal* money to pay for other things. That blue states have slightly more people on welfare could possibly be attributed to our governments not being unspeakably corrupt and not being willing to steal federal money.
It's worth noting that many states (and I'll let you guess the political make up of those states) kick people off the welfare rolls and then use that *federal* money to pay for other things. That blue states have slightly more people on welfare could possibly be attributed to our governments not being unspeakably corrupt and not being willing to steal federal money.
39
Preach DAN! Say it loudly so everyone can hear the truth.
So the moochers aren't all colored folk, huh? Good to know.
But let the Repubs keep singing their same old song. We'll hum it at the funeral of their party.
So the moochers aren't all colored folk, huh? Good to know.
But let the Repubs keep singing their same old song. We'll hum it at the funeral of their party.
40
It's not even just the out of touch rural folk, as I can attest having lived in South Philly. Stupidity knows no bounds. People must have some sort of cognitive dissonance that prevents them from connecting their own unemployment checks and medicare to government spending.
41
@15: You're getting your Scripture wrong. God told Moses to have the Israelites borrow as much stuff as they could from Egyptian neighbors, and obviously not have to return it upon leaving Mitzraim. Dick move, but well played.
So...are you threatening to take out a bunch of loans and then default on them after you secede? Dick move, but pretty stupid in this day and age.
So...are you threatening to take out a bunch of loans and then default on them after you secede? Dick move, but pretty stupid in this day and age.
42
I know. These people are idiots. Luckily old school Rockefeller Republicans like myself have turned to the Democrats and our good moderate President Obama to protect our interests from the sniveling hordes of white trash you find in this country.
43
I'm amazed that no-one has posted this yet:
http://fuckthesouth.com/
http://fuckthesouth.com/
The next dickwad who says, "It’s your money, not the government's money" is gonna get their ass kicked. Nine of the ten states that get the most federal fucking dollars and pay the least... can you guess? Go on, guess. That’s right, motherfucker, they're red states. And eight of the ten states that receive the least and pay the most? It’s too easy, asshole, they’re blue states. It’s not your money, assholes, it’s fucking our money. What was that Real American Value you were spouting a minute ago? Self reliance? Try this for self reliance: buy your own fucking stop signs, assholes.
44
Seeker @43: that appeared years ago on this very website.
Exactly eight years ago.
http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/Conte…
Exactly eight years ago.
http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/Conte…
45
Given that red states are mostly rural, I would guess most of the spending is: roads, agricultural subsidies, rural electrification and other infrastructure they would never get in the totally free market (because delivering mail, phone service, and electricity to rural areas has poor ROI).Yeah, fuckthesouth covered that too:
All those Federal taxes you love to hate? It all comes from us and goes to you, so shut up and enjoy your fucking Tennessee Valley Authority electricity and your fancy highways that we paid for. And the next time Florida gets hit by a hurricane you can come crying to us if you want to, but you're the ones who built on a fucking swamp. "Let the Spanish keep it, it’s a shithole," we said, but you had to have your fucking orange juice.
46
"The parasites now outnumber the producers"
You misspelt "customers", asshole. And we can take our business elsewhere if you like. Hell, some of us already have, and call it a "locavore" thing.
You misspelt "customers", asshole. And we can take our business elsewhere if you like. Hell, some of us already have, and call it a "locavore" thing.
47
Yep. Out here in BumFuck, everybody's a rugged individualist. But the moment you mention their rugged asses wouldn't even be here but for FDR's New Deal giveaway, plus the on-going Federal Bureau of Land Management giveaway to keep the whole thing running, they start sputterin' and fumin' and calling you an unAmerican Socialist.
And don't even get me started on farm subsidies, where the Feds pay the farmer to grow stuff, then the farmer writes off all his expenses so he pays the absolute minimum in income and SS taxes. They work hard, tho, unlike all the lazy moochers in the big cities. Grrr.
And don't even get me started on farm subsidies, where the Feds pay the farmer to grow stuff, then the farmer writes off all his expenses so he pays the absolute minimum in income and SS taxes. They work hard, tho, unlike all the lazy moochers in the big cities. Grrr.
48
@47 "... farm subsidies, where the Feds pay the farmer to grow stuff..."
Even more irritating is when the Feds pay folks to not grow stuff, and they still have the gall to call themselves farmers.
Even more irritating is when the Feds pay folks to not grow stuff, and they still have the gall to call themselves farmers.
49
So if you want your government to actually do something for you, you're a parasite?
I like that governments keep our cities from devolving into shit holes. I don't want to step over dead bodies or watch the homeless literally starve to death. And it's not out of some saintly compassion I possess; it's that I find that shit fucking depressing. I gladly pay tax dollars not to have to see that every day.
If Republicans are trying to sell the message that government should not do anything for anyone, or that people should not vote for the candidate that is more likely to improve their quality of life, then they will never win an election again.
I like that governments keep our cities from devolving into shit holes. I don't want to step over dead bodies or watch the homeless literally starve to death. And it's not out of some saintly compassion I possess; it's that I find that shit fucking depressing. I gladly pay tax dollars not to have to see that every day.
If Republicans are trying to sell the message that government should not do anything for anyone, or that people should not vote for the candidate that is more likely to improve their quality of life, then they will never win an election again.
50
Dan, According to the Wiki, Washington has two counties that are in the top 100 richest counties in the entire country. King and San Juan and both are Blue/Democrat. So the richest counties vote Democrat and the poorer counties vote Republican.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_…
If you don't use colors but use income your headline reads as 'fuck the working class and poor'.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_…
If you don't use colors but use income your headline reads as 'fuck the working class and poor'.
51
Obviously the solution is to build a city under the sea. That way they could get away from the 'parasites'.
What could go wrong?
What could go wrong?
52
Maybe it's like with relationships: cheaters will accuse you of cheating, control freaks that you're trying to control them, lying bastards won't believe anything you say, and so forth...
53
Dear Republican and Conservative logicians: When a person on Welfare pays rent, the value of the property stays stable. The land and school taxes get paid and the landlord receives the remainder as gross profit. If he keeps the property up, the hardware store and the carpet store make sales. The Gas and Electric company get "sales" and the taxes are collected on those. The recipient uses Food Stamps to buy food, so the grocer makes sales. The recipient buys toothpaste and laundry powder and the Drug store makes money. being on Medicaid, the recipient gets a breast exam every year, so the hospital gets paid to do a lumpectomy (a three day stay and a little chemo or radiation) as opposed to a four week to eight week deathbed stay passed along by the hospital to you, and a funeral and foster care for her kids paid for by the state and county. Yup, those 47% are suckin' at the public teat and draining this country dry. And since you don't do math, let's do metaphor: If the federal budget was a dump truck full of soybeans and you took out farm subsidies, interest paid to wall street biggies and the wars on brown people, you would have a bushel of beans. That is what welfare is.
54
Everyone bitching about Wyoming did not take the time to actually look at the data (including Dan.) Yes, Wyoming takes in $1.16 for every dollar it pays in federal taxes. But that is actually less than the average state ($1.29.) They are ranked 22. Furthermore, there is good justification for some increased federal spending in rural areas. The interstates through Wyoming, for example, are a good that benefits more than just the citizens of Wyoming and the per capita cost of maintaining those roads are much higher than in an urban state like Massachusetts. Similarly, providing the same level of education will cost more in less densely populated states.
There certainly are deep red states that receive outlandishly more in Federal dollars than they pay (Mississippi and Alabama for example.) Note that both of these states have extremely senior members of Congress.
That is not to say that the people in Wyoming have entirely legitimate arguments. But if you want to prove them wrong, don't resort to specious ill-researched arguments.
There certainly are deep red states that receive outlandishly more in Federal dollars than they pay (Mississippi and Alabama for example.) Note that both of these states have extremely senior members of Congress.
That is not to say that the people in Wyoming have entirely legitimate arguments. But if you want to prove them wrong, don't resort to specious ill-researched arguments.
55
Everyone bitching about Wyoming (including Dan) did not take the time to actually look at the data. Yes, Wyoming takes in $1.16 for every dollar it pays in federal taxes. But that is actually less than the average state ($1.29.) They are ranked 22. Furthermore, there is good justification for some increased federal spending in rural areas. The interstates through Wyoming, for example, are a good that benefits more than just the citizens of Wyoming and the per capita cost of maintaining those roads are much higher than in an urban state like Massachusetts. Similarly, providing the same level of education will cost more in less densely populated states.
There certainly are deep red states that receive outlandishly more in Federal dollars than they pay (Mississippi and Alabama for example.) Note that both of these states have extremely senior members of Congress.
That is not to say that the people in Wyoming have entirely legitimate arguments. But if you want to prove them wrong, don't resort to specious ill-researched arguments.
There certainly are deep red states that receive outlandishly more in Federal dollars than they pay (Mississippi and Alabama for example.) Note that both of these states have extremely senior members of Congress.
That is not to say that the people in Wyoming have entirely legitimate arguments. But if you want to prove them wrong, don't resort to specious ill-researched arguments.
58
@55- You don't get it. No one is saying "they're getting too much money." We're saying "You Red State assholes are the ones taking in the cash, so stop saying that urban liberals are sucking at government's teat instead of working hard. Our hard work is why you've got a road."
62
Federal spending isn't the half of it. All those rugged individualist ranchers run their cattle on federal lands for approximately no rent. That massive subsidy doesn't show up in the spending figures. Their main extraction industries benefit from lavish tax breaks. Those don't show up in the spending figures either.
63
The great red state paradox-- not only are they the the biggest recipients of federal largesse, they also lead in indicators of social malaise -- or "immorality" if you will--- like teen pregnancy, drug and alcohol abuse, divorce, prison population, etc. My favorite commment on this phenomenon is about Alaska- which has oil income (which is rapidly running out) and federal money: "They talk like Texas but live like Norway."
64
As an independent voter from Maine (a reliably "blue" state), I'd just like to say that while these red states as a whole may receive more federal dollars than they are paying in, you have to consider where that money may be going and how it affects the individual family. While I'm very liberal on most social issues, I'm unable to get behind these social welfare programs. People in Maine have the highest individual tax burden in the country. Not coincidentally, we also offer the most generous welfare benefits. Massachusetts and some other states actually pay the moving costs for their welfare recipients to relocate to Maine, which they are happy to do because it's a far sweeter deal. Because of this (and the fact that many of my extended family members have made a career out of welfare), I get to see the results of these programs up close. Good jobs in Maine are scarce, and our family has a gross income of less than $45k/year. Still, we manage to own land and a comfortable 3-bedroom home, and raise our two children without any help from the government. We do this by sacrificing pretty much all the little luxuries that are considered standard these days; we have no smart phones, no cable or satellite dish, we eat out less than once a month, etc. For the last ten years (as long as we've been married) we've watched our property taxes increase almost every year to pay for these programs. While we sacrifice and struggle, the thousands of dollars taken away from us each year ensure that welfare families have the phones, iPads, video games, and restaurant dinners that we can't afford. I'm not exaggerating, either. Our state actually pays people that get free housing (beautiful individual homes, no "projects" here) $5000 a year to NOT smoke inside the buildings! When you don't pay any of your own bills, that's a nice chunk of change to blow on whatever your heart desires. That's just one example of how our money is wasted. Anyone who judges welfare by its intentions will certainly support it, but anyone who actually takes a realistic look at the results will feel differently. Hardworking communities here are overrun with families who depend on welfare and have absolutely no intention of becoming self-sufficient, because that'll mean having to give up all the extras and lead a life like mine - and with a pesky job, to boot. I have voted many times to reign in our out-of-control welfare system, but I'll never win that fight because there are simply too many recipients voting to keep their benefits. The grumpy people in the red states do have a point. My husband and I are holding our breath, waiting to see if the Bush tax cuts for the middle class will be allowed to expire because if they do, we may very well find ourselves unable to pay the steadily rising property taxes. These issues are real, and there are real, hardworking families who will lose their homes while people who haven't worked a day in their lives put part of our paychecks toward their World of Warcraft subscriptions. Something so plainly broken, that makes so little sense, should not be a "red" or "blue" issue.
More...
65
@59 Yup. It's downright scary how much they sound like Andrew Ryan. Someone should make 'guess who said the comment' quiz on who said it, a Republican or Andrew Ryan.
Comments (65) RSS