There is no way Washington DC should be included on this list. They are the most
dependent on the Federal Government of all 50 states.
Interesting to note Utah, Alaska (and D.C. Of course) have the highest number of
federal employees per capita. UTahns are unaware of how much the
IRS contributes to their economy.
To "LOU Montana" can you tell us what the money is going for? For
example, in New Mexico they have most of their state land owned by the Federal
Government. Since it is owned by the Federal Government, the Feds pay what
amounts to a property tax. Or is the money going for welfare?There
is a difference. For example, if state controlled nearly all of the land
withing their state boundaries, they could collect additional revenues through
royalties and leases. If they are getting money for welfare, then there is a
dependance.So, tell us which states are getting the most welfare,
not property tax from the Feds.
Here’s a list of the top 10 states that got the most back in terms of
federal benefits, followed by the bottom 10.Top Ten (Source: Tax
Foundation):1. New Mexico 2. Mississippi 3. Alaska 4. Louisiana
5. W. Virginia 6. N. Dakota
7. Alabama 8. S. Dakota
9. Virginia 10. Kentucky
Now consider the bottom 10, i.e., the ones that give more to the
federal government in taxes than they get in return. From 1 to 10, they are:New
Jersey, Nevada, Connecticut, New Hampshire, Minnesota, Illinois, Delaware,
California, New York, Colorado.Anything strange about that list? Yes, they are
all blue states (or the deepest of purple).
golong,Objecting to D.C.'s inclusion in the list is
nit-picking. It is roughly equivalent to a state (except for the whole
“taxation without representation” thing), and is frequently included
in state ranking statistics.Most of the federal employees who work
in Washington, D.C. live in Virginia or Maryland. On the other hand, less than
a third of the workers residing in the District work for the government. Many
of the private sector workers living in D.C. work for businesses that either
support the federal government or extensively interact with it, such as law
firms, independent contractors, non-profit organizations, lobbying firms, trade
unions, industry trade groups, and professional associations that have their
headquarters in Washington.Tourism is Washington's second
largest industry, which would explain why nearly 10% of workers living in D.C.
work in "Leisure & Hospitality" occupations.Washington,
D.C. is also home to Georgetown University, George Washington University,
Washington Hospital Center, Children's National Medical Center, and Howard
University. Not coincidentally, over 15% of workers living in D.C. work in
"Education & Health Services" occupations.So, yes,
it’s okay to include Washington D.C. on the list; and no, it
shouldn’t be ranked 51st.
Interesting to note that the western states have higher levels of federal
employees per capita than east and west coast states. With vast amount of land
governed and regulated by federal employees of one kind or another, some of
these areas are larger than some states. I would think that our western states,
with smaller populations, would have to be highly productive per capita to
enable any western state to fall high in this type of ranking.
Perhaps the time has come for the federal government to return more control of
the states and their funding to the states. If each state was in charge of
national parks, forests, etc. Than they would not have to rely on DC for
funding. The states would hire and pay local people for their services and the
work load of dept of interior would reduce and taxpapers dollars could go to pay
off the national debt.
@cjb'Work is not the same as welfare or a handout.'That depends on how you define work. Civil service, and dare I say many
military positions, are not real jobs. I was in the military. I know what
it's like. Thank goodness I have a real job now. I get paid way less and
have no benefits, but at least I have regained my self respect. Then again,
working for the government really isn't the same as welfare or a handout. I
could never party like a GSA or IRS rockstar in Vegas with just a measly welfare
The article says that the Blue States are less dependent on the Federal
Government, but we already knew that Republican states generally don't pay
their way, though Right Wingers insist the opposite is true.But
Right Wingers are continually contradicting reality in their unfounded
beliefs.I think the study should have involved more data components.
It included the payments to Federal employees, but it did not include payments
to Federal retirees.If it had included payments to federal retirees,
it's likely the disparity between Red and Blue states would have been much
greater.We pay over $50 billion every year to military retirees
alone, and much more to non-military federal retirees, and most of them settle
down in their home (Red) states or move to a warm Red state like Arizona or
Florida.If federal retirement pay had been included to analyze the
data, it most likely would have shown the Red states as being much more
dependent on Federal money.
DC is on the list. First, DC is not a state, and second it has so many federal
employees, how can it even be on the list. It probably belongs at number 50...or
If a state has lots of federal government employees rather than say the state is
highly dependent on the federal government, more accurate would be to say that
state and the federal government are highly dependent on each other.Work is not the same as welfare or a handout.
There are way too many federal employees in ALL states. No wonder Romney lost.
When you factor in corporate subsidies and deductions for homeowners' tax
burdens, you come up with all kinds of different perceptions about social
welfare/food stamps/social security, etc. About 59 billions is spent on social
welfare programs, while 92 billion is spent on corporate subsidies. One must
really get facts prior to criticizing the poor. I don't like scammers any
more than the next person, but it's the rich who are taking waaaay more of
your hard-earned dollars out of your pocket.
If we simply looked at the number of people dependent upon government, at any
level, for their livelihood, it would be much more revealing. (Welfare Recipients + Food Stamp Recipients + Federal Employees + State
Employees + Social Security Recipients) / Population = Percent dependent upon
government.While many of these people provide valuable services and
Social Security Recipients have earned what they are getting, the closer this
figure moves toward zero the better.
After being sold out on Common Core I would have thought that our dependence on
the Federal Government would have been more. Can you imagine how much less
dependent we would be without the string tied into Common Core?
If you go to the wallethub website and click on the red vs blue link,
you'll see that the blue states rate 19.1 vs red states 33.3 rating. 19.1
being least dependent on Federal Taxes..
To "Mike W" I have never heard a conservative say that liberal states
are moochers. It is true that the urban welfare recipiants typically vote for
Democrats. Who said that liberal states are moochers? Liberal states are
struggling more than conservative ones, and are having bigger problems with
their budgets.To "UTCProgress" I don't think you heard
what I said. I was not talking about all conservatives states. I said
"Wait a minute. The liberals always told me that Utah was one of the most
dependent states. How can we be the 14th least dependent?" If your ilk says
that Utah is so dependent on federal money, how can we be 14th least dependent?
Doesn't that mean that we cover most of our own expenses?If we
can cover so much of our own expenses while only controlling 36% of the land in
Utah, don't you think that if we gained controll of another 36% or more
that we could nearly get out from under the money that the Feds send Utah each
Tom2 posted: "It is interesting to me that most of the states on the list
are considered "blue states"."You got it backwards.This is a list of LEAST dependent states. ie, all those blue states
give more in taxes then they get back. For every dollar Utah pays in taxes, 86
cents comes back. The blue states have to carry the red states.
@RedShirtGo read the report. It says that "conservative"
states are generally more dependent on the federal government than
"liberal" states. Don't let the data get in the way of your
Re: RedShirtThe conservatives always tell me how the liberal states
are the ones mooching off the hard working tax payer... most of these states are
Wait a minute. The liberals always told me that Utah was one of the most
dependent states. How can we be the 14th least dependent?
Kind of curious about how this list was put together. For instance Washington
state, which is listed as #16 has a higher return on taxpayer investment, lower
funding as a percent of revenue, and a lower number of Federal employees per
capita than #14 Utah. To me this would indicate that Washington should rank
higher than Utah on this scale, not lower. Are we just selectively ignoring
Nothing beyond the creations of nature itself, exists in the United States of
America that is not protected, enabled, supplemented, or otherwise made possible
by the Federal government of the United States of America. The
notion that people benefit from their American citizenship according to the
state or local where they live is false. All Americans, no matter where they
live, are subject to the same federal taxes, the same obligations, have the same
rights, and the same protections as every other American. The
ranking of states according to how much money comes and goes is irrelevant. The
fact that some state oppress or enable their residents to different degrees does
not effect the citizenship of Americans.
Highly deceptive article.A simpler measure is "does a state take
more goverment money than it gives?"Utah is a taker. The
programs running in Utah could not survive without Federal money.
Lists like this are alway interesting to me, but I understand they're a
manipulation of what someone is trying to "prove".Keep in
mind this in one sample using a specific set of guidelines. Use a different set
of guidelines and the list would change dramatically. If this
supports/denies your political views... keep that in mind!
It is interesting to me that most of the states on the list are considered
"blue states". I naively expected it to be the opposite. It kind of
flies in the face of the popular opinions about Democrats and Republicans.
It surprises me that Utah is #14. We have a lot of wilderness land that is
covered by the feds, Hill AFB and other smaller military installations, and
multiple defense contractors. I am betting that our ranking on the list will
change when we ask the feds for $900 million to move the prison.
DC is not a atate.