PER CAPITA

Data: https://usafacts.org/articles/which-states-contribute-the-most-and-least-to-federal-revenue/, https://www.usaspending.gov/

Tool: Mapchart

Posted by snakkerdudaniel

33 comments

  3. Is this per capita? Per taxpayer? or is it totals at a ratio?

  4. Must be nice to leech off of everyone else eh Mississippi, WV? Am i paying for your fast food?

  7. Weird, I thought Michigan would be higher on the list, as in they pay out more than they receive.

  9. Not the map I was expecting tbh. Makes a ton of sense for some of these but was thrown off by OR, VA, VT, ME.

  10. This is a bad year to generalize from. End of the Pandemic.

  11. Good thing Adolph Shittler just took away already-allocated funds from all his “enemy” states today.

  12. Is Delaware doing something right or is this because there are so many businesses incorporated there?

  13. Im not surprised MT is where it is. And CA initially caught me off guard. And then I remembered. for the same reason as MT. Except with a giant economy.

    MT has 7 reservations, and a bunch of national parks and wilderness areas that are all managed by federal funds.

    California has apparently nearly 100 small reservations, and a bunch of national parks and protected forests that are all managed by federal funds.

    What i think would be far more interesting as a data point would be this same statistic. But you remove all native american funds, and all public lands funds. What states are net receivers of federal funds when when we control for native reservations, and the management of our public lands.

    TLDR: in which states is the average Joe a net receiver?

    EDIT: From the dataset *Controlling for population, Alaska and its residents received the most money per person, at $24,141, about a quarter of which came from funding agreements between the Indian Health Service and tribes in the state.* Holy Moly 25%! Its a big hole in the dataset.

    EDIT2: I wanna pre-empt this. If you ask why we should control for spending on public lands. Then I guess you support selling them. If not, clearly they are valuable to us nationally and it skews the dataset by considering the management of a public asset as the people of a state taking from everyone else.

  14. This is bizarre as I see data often showing Texas as a net giver and other data showing a large taker. Not sure what to believe

  16. It’s weirdly satisfying to me to see Kansas sitting in the middle there visually but also on the scale lol

  17. I love that the left tries to claim that ‘all the blue states subsidize the red states’, when in reality, its a mix across the board.

  18. This is interestingly pretty apolitical. Red and blue states on both sides of the divide.

  20. Does this include military spending? If so, it would be interesting to see how things change if you took out military spending. 

  21. Orange and Blue are better for these sorts of maps. 8% of men and .5% of women have some kind of red green colorblindness.

  22. This is a silly presentation and a misleading title. “States” don’t pay anything into the federal government, their residents do. “States” in general also receive relatively very little of the money being attributed to them in this figure; the vast majority of the expenditure is paid out, again, to specific state residents in the form of benefit programs like Medicare and food stamps. This presentation clearly supposes the conclusion that e.g. the state of Alaska in general is using money from e.g. the state of California, but that conclusion is inaccurate. The correct conclusion is that poor residents of Alaska (a large proportion of which, in that particular case, are actually American Indians) are using money from wealthy residents and businesses across the country, which should surprise no one who has even a rudimentary understanding of the American tax and welfare system.

  23. States don’t pay anything to the federal government, taxpayers do. 

  24. Someone should really do one where federal payroll is taken out of the equation so Virginia is not forever looked at as a handout state.

    The data should really be just social welfare and corporate subsidies (agricultural, green energy, etc) vs. personal and corporate income tax.

    You can really tell who the handout states are mooching off the rest of the productive states.

  26. I was lead to believe all the blue states funded all the red states. This map, at least, says otherwise.

  27. Every time I see a map like this I remember Joe Manchin of West Virginia criticizing raising the SALT cap (mostly benefits people in those green states) as a “government handout”.

  28. Would the BIA payments to states with large reservations skew this because of water and mineral rights? It appears that large reservations are in states that receive more money from the federal government.

    Edit: I forgot BIA is the Bureau of Indian Affairs

  29. If this is the same or similar data that went around a few months ago, it’s a bit misleading compared to how people would instinctively define what goes into these measures. That was including things like federal employee and contractor salaries, which is not really “taking,” unless you’re going to count the value of the work the employees do on the “giving” side. It’s why states with high federal workforce populations seem to receive so much.

  30. Love to see this over the next 2 years w all the Doge MAGA cuts happening along w all the other guttings going on

  31. Misleading, doesn’t account for the $40tril of debt. All are “red”

  32. Nebraska seems like an interesting standout, what are they doing differently from the other central plains states?

  33. States don’t pay federal taxes. US citizens pay federal taxes. Are we going to do the same thing for all the other places on Earth where US citizens are living? Basically every country on Earth with at least one American living there is “paying” more than its share of US taxes.

Comments are closed.