06-12-2015, 01:00 PM
"Take a look at the difference between federal spending on any given state and the federal taxes received from that state. We measure the difference as a dollar amount: Federal Spending per Dollar of Federal Taxes. A figure of $1.00 means that particular state received as much as it paid in to the federal government. Anything over a dollar means the state received more than it paid; anything less than $1.00 means the state paid more in taxes than it received in services. The higher the figure, the more a given state is a welfare queen."
Unless I'm missing something, the article, despite misusing the offensive term 'welfare queen', is only talking about how many dollars go to the FED versus how many go back to the state. This can be anything: Highway subsidies, bridges to nowhere, various pork projects, EPA multi-billion-dollar Superfund cleanup sites, etc. If that is right, then kudos to the representatives of those states for DOING THEIR JOBS OF REPRESENTING THEIR CONSTITUENCY, regardless of their political affiliation.
ETA: Grammar, punctuation
Unless I'm missing something, the article, despite misusing the offensive term 'welfare queen', is only talking about how many dollars go to the FED versus how many go back to the state. This can be anything: Highway subsidies, bridges to nowhere, various pork projects, EPA multi-billion-dollar Superfund cleanup sites, etc. If that is right, then kudos to the representatives of those states for DOING THEIR JOBS OF REPRESENTING THEIR CONSTITUENCY, regardless of their political affiliation.
ETA: Grammar, punctuation