3 ms·

Yes, let’s investigate it: "Republican-leaning red states tend to have less wealth and receive more federal government funds than they pay…Policy choices may p

Yes, let’s investigate it: "Republican-leaning red states tend to have less wealth and receive more federal government funds than they pay…Policy choices may partially explain this relationship…"A really conservative state might choose to tax itself at a lower rate, which means by default, they can give fewer state-funded services… "That can exacerbate the situation.” Blue states are subsidizing red states, red states that have socioeconomic problems largely caused by red state policies.

vorpalhex 4y ago
So is DC a "red state"? Why does California have insane crime? What is going on in Chicago? Why is most of the midwest, which leans quite red, the safest part of the country alongside the very blue upper eastcoast? California was the biggest receiver of federal funds for a long, long time. It does not seem to have made a difference positively or negatively in it's violent crime rate. Texas has always paid more to the Fed than received, yet we have our own very violent cities (and some of the safest ones).
- sammalloy 4y ago
  Of the ten most dangerous US states in 2023 (Alaska, New Mexico, Tennessee, Arkansas, Arizona, Louisiana, Missouri, South Carolina, South Dakota, Michigan), seven are red states.
  - giantg2 4y ago
    "in 2023" You mean 2022? 2023 data would be incomplete. Often times it takes 12-18 months from year end for the data to be compiled and verified. And what does your comment add to the conversation anyways?
  - vorpalhex 4y ago
    So? By your own admission, intentionally excluding DC, red states don't lock out blue states for the most violence. What do Alaska and New Mexico have in common that makes them such dangerous places? It doesn't seem like it's their politics. Utah, a deeply red state, is one of the ten safest states. Politically Utah looks a lot more like that deep south than Vermont, another extremely safe state.
giantg2 4y ago
Sure, fewer services can be one of the many socioeconomic factors. And of course the states with the highest per capita income (more industrialized blue states) end up providing the bulk of the funding. But as others have said, this divide is not that clear cut. There are states with higher murder rates that are Democrat and states with lower rates that are Republican. Of course the definition of what category a state falls in is also up for debate (presidential vote, governor, legislature, combination?). https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territories_by_intentional_homicide_rate https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_terr... "socioeconomic problems largely caused by red state policies." Can you elaborate? It seems a lot of the issue with economics and opportunities is not just something that can be legislated away. You can see a lot of this is geographically concentrated looking at the county level rates and likely has a historical basis, such as how the south has been a primary sector producer while the north was a secondary sector producer. In the transition to a tertiary sector economy, it's pretty obvious which group gets left behind.

vorpalhex 4y ago

So is DC a "red state"? Why does California have insane crime? What is going on in Chicago? Why is most of the midwest, which leans quite red, the safest part of the country alongside the very blue upper eastcoast? California was the biggest receiver of federal funds for a long, long time. It does not seem to have made a difference positively or negatively in it's violent crime rate. Texas has always paid more to the Fed than received, yet we have our own very violent cities (and some of the safest ones).

sammalloy 4y ago
Of the ten most dangerous US states in 2023 (Alaska, New Mexico, Tennessee, Arkansas, Arizona, Louisiana, Missouri, South Carolina, South Dakota, Michigan), seven are red states.
- giantg2 4y ago
  "in 2023" You mean 2022? 2023 data would be incomplete. Often times it takes 12-18 months from year end for the data to be compiled and verified. And what does your comment add to the conversation anyways?
- vorpalhex 4y ago
  So? By your own admission, intentionally excluding DC, red states don't lock out blue states for the most violence. What do Alaska and New Mexico have in common that makes them such dangerous places? It doesn't seem like it's their politics. Utah, a deeply red state, is one of the ten safest states. Politically Utah looks a lot more like that deep south than Vermont, another extremely safe state.

giantg2 4y ago

Sure, fewer services can be one of the many socioeconomic factors. And of course the states with the highest per capita income (more industrialized blue states) end up providing the bulk of the funding. But as others have said, this divide is not that clear cut. There are states with higher murder rates that are Democrat and states with lower rates that are Republican. Of course the definition of what category a state falls in is also up for debate (presidential vote, governor, legislature, combination?). https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territories_by_intentional_homicide_rate https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_terr... "socioeconomic problems largely caused by red state policies." Can you elaborate? It seems a lot of the issue with economics and opportunities is not just something that can be legislated away. You can see a lot of this is geographically concentrated looking at the county level rates and likely has a historical basis, such as how the south has been a primary sector producer while the north was a secondary sector producer. In the transition to a tertiary sector economy, it's pretty obvious which group gets left behind.