Results 126 to 150 of 163
Thread: Poor Idaho
-
06-10-2021, 01:48 PM #126
My neighbors have 3 rescues. National Pyr Rescue
“When you see something that is not right, not just, not fair, you have a moral obligation to say something. To do something." Rep. John Lewis
Kindness is a bridge between all people
Dunkin’ Donuts Worker Dances With Customer Who Has Autism
-
06-10-2021, 01:49 PM #127
I agree wholeheartedly. My Pyr is the sweetest dog I've ever had.
Live Free or Die
-
06-10-2021, 04:23 PM #128glocal
- Join Date
- May 2002
- Posts
- 33,440
Not many dogs that will fight and kill 5 wolves at the same time then turn around and go for the bear and, if you put a newborn infant in front of the same dog, he'll guard it with his life.
I read a year or two ago that a Pyr was found dead in SE ID, killed by some kind of super wolf, they suspect - cause that shit happens never.
-
06-10-2021, 04:27 PM #129
wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federa...nding_by_state --Idaho receives 15B in Federal spending and
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federa...venue_by_state Idaho --Idaho pays 4B in federal taxes
-
06-10-2021, 05:40 PM #130
Where did you get the 4B from? The expenditures chart is from 2013 and the closest revenue chart in that link would be 2012 (2013 -2014 are missing)
Federal taxes paid: Idaho 2012 $7,622,490,000
Federal Spending: Idaho 2013 $15,139,000,000
The great state of Hawaii with all its fine upscale and highly educated people is worse:
Federal taxes paid 2012: Hawaii $6,511,578,000
Federal Spending 2013: Hawaii $19,309,000,000
Also was this disclaimer on revenues: The gross collections total only reflects the revenue collected from the categories listed in the table, and not the entire revenue collected by the IRS.
-
06-10-2021, 06:58 PM #131
4 billion or 7 billion, who cares, they’re a bunch of freeloaders.
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
-
06-10-2021, 10:06 PM #132
thanks for checking my error. The point is not whether it's educated states or uneducated states, rich states or poor states that are net beneficiaries of or contributors to the federal budget. The point is that those people in Idaho who want to be free of the federal government but they might not be so happy if it means they have to stop sucking at the federal teat.
-
06-10-2021, 10:13 PM #133
Freedom isn’t Free…
-
06-11-2021, 07:52 AM #134
I get the point you are TRYING to make. I am just suggesting that perhaps the way you are doing it is not quite accurate with just raw in and raw out.
1. Look at the breakout on expenditures. Retirement benefits, non-retirement benefits, grants, salaries, etc. Its not fair to include retirement benefits because those were paid it in working (tax paying) years and paid out in non-working (low or no tax paying) years. Plus people move to cheaper locals in retirement. You could working 30yrs in CA and pay taxes in that state, move to Idaho and collect for the rest of your life. No correlation between in/out for either state. I would expect FLORIDA to have a sizable differentiation based on that. Look it up:
Florida 2012 out = $122B
Florida 2013 in = $190B
And yes indeed....as expected. And remember - people pay INTO federal retirement and are entitled to collect...would you argue against that? I am sure a person who wants to be free of the federal government would gladly not take retirement benefits if you the federal government didn't confiscate them from him throughout his life....Grants, salaries, wages? Perhaps a state has a unique post/company/installation like a military base or national park or ? Is it fair to measure that? The Fed OWNS that. So I would focus maybe more on non-retirement benefits as that is more likely to be "teat" sucking?...BUT I have no clue what that column contains...could maybe be broken out more to ensure we are looking at correct data.
2. And most important...we run a federal deficit every year. I am not going to cross check EVERY STATE, but back in the 2012-2013 era I think we were running 3-4B deficits....and the totals in the chart show that:
Gross Collections 2012 = 2.5T
Gross expenditures 2013 = 3.1T
So right there you can see as a US whole..."we" are sucking at the federal teat. I would bet if you look at each state you will find probably most of...if not ALL states taking in more that paid out. Heck...lets just look at CA for example:
2012 revenue = $292B
2013 expenditure = $343B
A huge net negative. But of course....thats what I would expect given the overall trend.
Also you could further compare on per-capita...raw numbers distort populations.
Anyways. I don't have a narrative for or against Idaho people nor do I know whether some "state" is sucking at the federal teat. I am just a data/statistical freak trying to point out a few interpretation flaws and offer up an opportunity for a new look at it and come up with a more data-driven conclusion.
-
06-11-2021, 08:02 AM #135
RE the retirement issue. Most people will receive far more in SS benefits than they paid in SS taxes. And even if that were not true it doesn't change the overall balance of payments.
Here's some more recent data. https://rockinst.org/issue-areas/fis...yments-portal/
And the point is STILL--Idaho, like most states, would be worse off financially out of the US.
-
06-11-2021, 08:04 AM #136______
- Join Date
- Aug 2020
- Posts
- 1,218
I don’t understand why these people don’t just move to Idaho. Way faster way to get what you want, which is to be governed by like minded people. I guess they need a hobby?
-
06-11-2021, 08:19 AM #137
-
06-11-2021, 08:32 AM #138
I would hope if you gave 12.4% of every dollar you ever made for over 40 years to the government that you would at least get something in return. You could put that same money almost anywhere else and do better.
I'd also save the "you don't put 12.4% in you put 6.2%" because if you don't think your employer pays you less because they have to pay the other half you probably went to an Idaho public school.Live Free or Die
-
06-11-2021, 08:42 AM #139
-
06-11-2021, 08:45 AM #140
-
06-11-2021, 08:46 AM #141
RE: retirement benefits:
no it wouldn't change balance of payments in the US as a whole...but as I pointed out...people move so it does effect the balance in states - Florida and Hawaii were prime examples I gave. CA, NY, OR, etc would be the reverse example.
RE: Idaho worse off:
Probably....but I tend to think all states would be that way. There is a certain advantage to the union as was extensively spelled it in Hamilton/Jay/Madison's federalist papers back in the day.
I've always gotten the idea that many IDAHOANS....not Idaho as a state as thats just a collect of a bunch of individuals all with their own particular opinion (even those opposed)...are merely looking for less Federal intrusion into state policy. I know people like that in CA, OR, OH, WI, MI, FL, TX....I even know someone that lives in Spokane that would LOVE to live in Idaho (Sandpointe or CDL) that seriously wants full on socialism. So we can't blanket the whole state as a much of Backwoods Bundy's. Shiite....you should hear what people in the rest of the US say about CA people....and I don't think thats fair either.
I always chuckle when people say "CA could be the 7th largest economy in the world if they broke away" in trashing the rest of the US...umm yeah....sure...but would it really still be the 7th largest and would it still be successful AFTER it broke away?
-
06-11-2021, 08:51 AM #142
Maybe more Cali libs moving to ID. Or possibly Cali cons looking to get away from Cali libs?
https://www.ktvb.com/article/news/lo...5-faf024a16f7c"We don't beat the reaper by living longer, we beat the reaper by living well and living fully." - Randy Pausch
-
06-11-2021, 08:55 AM #143
-
06-11-2021, 08:56 AM #144
I think this is a good thing....people have ranted for years about how crowded the US is...I've always scratched my head and wondered if these people have ever been to AK, ID, MT, UT, etc. Land everywhere with no people! Its smart to spread out. Probably less fighting and stress if we don't all live on top of each other.
-
06-11-2021, 09:21 AM #145
UT is one of the most urbanized states in the nation, meaning the highest percentage of their population living in cities. NV and AZ are high on the list too. Main reason-water. You can't spread out in places that don't have water.
-
06-11-2021, 09:24 AM #146
Iadaho lawmakers are saying they would welcome the rural Oregon counties that want to become part of Idaho with open arms. Problem is, those Oregon counties that want to leave Oregon receive way more federal and state funding than they contribute (they are the poor counties in Oregon). Part of me almost wants to see them leave Oregon just to see what a cluserfuck the situation becomes when you have anti-government people fighting anti-government people.
-
06-11-2021, 09:25 AM #147
-
06-11-2021, 09:29 AM #148
Are they really "anti-government" or just looking for less intrusion (smaller federal government) and more inclusion into decision making.
I feel for rural folks in states with large metro populations...they care little about big city problems (and vice versa) but are outvoted and outnumbered.
-
06-11-2021, 09:30 AM #149
Go read the CA is dry thread from start to finish to educate yourself. I always thought Beaverton had good schools.
-
06-11-2021, 09:41 AM #150
The Oregon counties that want to leave want to chop down trees. They somehow think if they leave Idaho everything will go back to the 1970s and the mills will open back up. But it is the Endangered Species Act, and spotted owl, that prevents chopping, and that won't change if they join Idaho.
CA and WA have a major economic advantage over Idaho that will never go away. Deep water ports for trade to Asia and military bases (which need to be in strategic places, like the coast and corners of the country). Those both bring in blue collar jobs, means tax revenue, means better schools, better schools means tech companies. Idaho can't replicate this.
Bookmarks