why do red states give more to charity than blue states?

Posted in the Bellefontaine Forum

Comments
1 - 6 of 6 Comments Last updated Aug 23, 2012

“ I AGITATE LIBERALS”

Since: Sep 11

Bellefontaine, OH

#1 Aug 22, 2012
Red states more charitable, but religion more a factor than wealth
Published August 20, 2012
FoxNews.com
Residents in Republican-leaning states give more of their money to charity than those in Democrat-leaning states, according to a new study.

The Chronicle of Philanthropy's study released this week found the eight states with residents who gave the highest percentage of their income to charity in 2008 also voted that year for Republican presidential nominee John McCain. And the seven states in which residents donated the lowest percentage of their income that year voted for President Obama, based on 2008 IRS information.

The eight top charitable states were Utah, Mississippi, Alabama, Tennessee, South Carolina, Idaho, Arkansas and Georgia, as reported first by The Politico. On the other end of the spectrum were Wisconsin, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, Vermont, Maine and New Hampshire.

And don't assume the biggest givers were the wealthier states. Mississippi and Idaho rank among the lowest in the country in per-capita income.

That suggests other factors are involved, and the study’s authors said the reasons for the differences were in part a function of religion and a region’s political philosophy about “the role of government versus charity.”

“Regions of the country that are deeply religious are more generous than those that are not,” the study's authors said.

"The regional differences in giving are stark,” the authors also said.“In states like Utah and Mississippi, the typical household gives more than 7 percent of its income to charity after taxes, housing, food and other living expenses, while the average household in Massachusetts and three other New England states gives less than 3 percent.”

Two of the top nine states -- Utah and Idaho -- have high numbers of Mormon residents, who have a tradition of tithing at least 10 percent of their income to the church. And the remaining states in the top nine are in the Bible Belt, the study found.

The study included only taxpayers who said they had incomes of $50,000 or more.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#2 Aug 22, 2012
Don...They may give more because they get more...

Flip to any news channel in the past three years, and you can almost be certain to see any number of Republican governors, blustering about how Washington spends too much money and how they'd never spend that much money if they were President. It's a lot of tough talk, really. But is there any truth to it?

Well, all of this tough budget talk from Republicans got me thinking about the central: who really benefits from government spending? If you listen to Rush Limbaugh, you might think it was those blue states, packed with damn hippie socialist liberals, sipping their lattes and providing free abortions for bored, horny teenagers.

The truth? Not so fast, Michele Bachmann.

As it turns out, it is red states that are overwhelmingly the Welfare Queen States. Yes, that's right. Red States — the ones governed by folks who think government is too big and spending needs to be cut — are a net drain on the economy, taking in more federal spending than they pay out in federal taxes. They talk a good game, but stick Blue States with the bill.

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.

Of the twenty worst states, 16 are either Republican dominated or conservative states. Let's go through the top twenty.
•New Mexico:$2.03
•Mississippi:$2.02
•Alaska:$1.84
•Louisiana:$1.78
•West Virginia:$1.76
•North Dakota:$1.68
•Alabama:$1.66
•South Dakota:$1.53
•Kentucky:$1.51
•Virginia:$1.51
•Montana:$1.47
•Hawaii:$1.44
•Maine:$1.41
•Arkansas:$1.41
•Oklahoma:$1.36
•South Carolina:$1.35
•Missouri:$1.32
•Maryland:$1.30
•Tennessee:$1.27
•Idaho:$1.21

Does anyone else notice the overwhelming presence of northern "rugged individualist" states, like Alaska, the Dakotas and Montana, along with most of the South? Why it's almost like there's a pattern here or something.

Where can we find liberal bastions California, New York, and Massachusetts? California is 43rd, getting back only $0.78 for every dollar it sends to Washington. New York is 42nd, and one penny better off, at $0.79 per dollar. Massachusetts is 40th, receiving $0.82 for every dollar it sends to DC.

Go ahead and bookmark this article. The next time some smarmy teabagger tries to tell you it's liberals who are ruining the country and spending us into oblivion, kindly point them to the evidence that shows it is GOP states, not Democrat states, who are Welfare Queens. It is GOP states who spend more than they collect in taxes. It is GOP states who are out of balance, nationally.

See if they still want to cut off funding when it means no more socialism for slave states.

“Against worldly chaos and evil”

Since: Jan 10

This side of Hope

#3 Aug 22, 2012
Ironbutterfly wrote:
Don...They may give more because they get more...
Flip to any news channel in the past three years, and you can almost be certain to see any number of Republican governors, blustering about how Washington spends too much money and how they'd never spend that much money if they were President. It's a lot of tough talk, really. But is there any truth to it?
Well, all of this tough budget talk from Republicans got me thinking about the central: who really benefits from government spending? If you listen to Rush Limbaugh, you might think it was those blue states, packed with damn hippie socialist liberals, sipping their lattes and providing free abortions for bored, horny teenagers.
The truth? Not so fast, Michele Bachmann.
As it turns out, it is red states that are overwhelmingly the Welfare Queen States. Yes, that's right. Red States — the ones governed by folks who think government is too big and spending needs to be cut — are a net drain on the economy, taking in more federal spending than they pay out in federal taxes. They talk a good game, but stick Blue States with the bill.
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.
Of the twenty worst states, 16 are either Republican dominated or conservative states. Let's go through the top twenty.
•New Mexico:$2.03
•Mississippi:$2.02
•Alaska:$1.84
•Louisiana:$1.78
•West Virginia:$1.76
•North Dakota:$1.68
•Alabama:$1.66
•South Dakota:$1.53
•Kentucky:$1.51
•Virginia:$1.51
•Montana:$1.47
•Hawaii:$1.44
•Maine:$1.41
•Arkansas:$1.41
•Oklahoma:$1.36
•South Carolina:$1.35
•Missouri:$1.32
•Maryland:$1.30
•Tennessee:$1.27
•Idaho:$1.21
Does anyone else notice the overwhelming presence of northern "rugged individualist" states, like Alaska, the Dakotas and Montana, along with most of the South? Why it's almost like there's a pattern here or something.
Where can we find liberal bastions California, New York, and Massachusetts? California is 43rd, getting back only $0.78 for every dollar it sends to Washington. New York is 42nd, and one penny better off, at $0.79 per dollar. Massachusetts is 40th, receiving $0.82 for every dollar it sends to DC.
Go ahead and bookmark this article. The next time some smarmy teabagger tries to tell you it's liberals who are ruining the country and spending us into oblivion, kindly point them to the evidence that shows it is GOP states, not Democrat states, who are Welfare Queens. It is GOP states who spend more than they collect in taxes. It is GOP states who are out of balance, nationally.
See if they still want to cut off funding when it means no more socialism for slave states.
Bravo! Good post!

“ I AGITATE LIBERALS”

Since: Sep 11

Bellefontaine, OH

#4 Aug 23, 2012
Ironbutterfly wrote:
Don...They may give more because they get more...
Flip to any news channel in the past three years, and you can almost be certain to see any number of Republican governors, blustering about how Washington spends too much money and how they'd never spend that much money if they were President. It's a lot of tough talk, really. But is there any truth to it?
Well, all of this tough budget talk from Republicans got me thinking about the central: who really benefits from government spending? If you listen to Rush Limbaugh, you might think it was those blue states, packed with damn hippie socialist liberals, sipping their lattes and providing free abortions for bored, horny teenagers.
The truth? Not so fast, Michele Bachmann.
As it turns out, it is red states that are overwhelmingly the Welfare Queen States. Yes, that's right. Red States — the ones governed by folks who think government is too big and spending needs to be cut — are a net drain on the economy, taking in more federal spending than they pay out in federal taxes. They talk a good game, but stick Blue States with the bill.
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.
Of the twenty worst states, 16 are either Republican dominated or conservative states. Let's go through the top twenty.
•New Mexico:$2.03
•Mississippi:$2.02
•Alaska:$1.84
•Louisiana:$1.78
•West Virginia:$1.76
•North Dakota:$1.68
•Alabama:$1.66
•South Dakota:$1.53
•Kentucky:$1.51
•Virginia:$1.51
•Montana:$1.47
•Hawaii:$1.44
•Maine:$1.41
•Arkansas:$1.41
•Oklahoma:$1.36
•South Carolina:$1.35
•Missouri:$1.32
•Maryland:$1.30
•Tennessee:$1.27
•Idaho:$1.21
Does anyone else notice the overwhelming presence of northern "rugged individualist" states, like Alaska, the Dakotas and Montana, along with most of the South? Why it's almost like there's a pattern here or something.
Where can we find liberal bastions California, New York, and Massachusetts? California is 43rd, getting back only $0.78 for every dollar it sends to Washington. New York is 42nd, and one penny better off, at $0.79 per dollar. Massachusetts is 40th, receiving $0.82 for every dollar it sends to DC.
Go ahead and bookmark this article. The next time some smarmy teabagger tries to tell you it's liberals who are ruining the country and spending us into oblivion, kindly point them to the evidence that shows it is GOP states, not Democrat states, who are Welfare Queens. It is GOP states who spend more than they collect in taxes. It is GOP states who are out of balance, nationally.
See if they still want to cut off funding when it means no more socialism for slave states.
Why should we believe anything u say?

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#5 Aug 23, 2012
DON W SOUTH wrote:
<quoted text>Why should we believe anything u say?
HeHe....You should not. You should only believe what your tea party friends tell you because they are all knowing. You see how many came to your aid on the thread you started. Now, it is true, they might have communicated to you in other ways, but it didn't appear they were looking for a firefight. If I were you, I would be wondering why. Brothers in Arms....hardly. They also do not respond to the Tea Party threads, mostly only you do. Like jackels they hide in the shadows, and are content to let an old man walk point for them. You have more balls than brains...yet you will fight the fight, come hell or high water. That in itself is commendable. My battle is no longer with you, but with those who would use you for a puppet. I'm told 'one shot, one kill' is on this site. It is that one & the one who takes pictures that I wish to do verbal battle with. Tell them to come out and play. And tell them to quit hiding behind their grandfather.

&fe ature=related

“ I AGITATE LIBERALS”

Since: Sep 11

Bellefontaine, OH

#6 Aug 23, 2012
Ironbutterfly wrote:
<quoted text>
HeHe....You should not. You should only believe what your tea party friends tell you because they are all knowing. You see how many came to your aid on the thread you started. Now, it is true, they might have communicated to you in other ways, but it didn't appear they were looking for a firefight. If I were you, I would be wondering why. Brothers in Arms....hardly. They also do not respond to the Tea Party threads, mostly only you do. Like jackels they hide in the shadows, and are content to let an old man walk point for them. You have more balls than brains...yet you will fight the fight, come hell or high water. That in itself is commendable. My battle is no longer with you, but with those who would use you for a puppet. I'm told 'one shot, one kill' is on this site. It is that one & the one who takes pictures that I wish to do verbal battle with. Tell them to come out and play. And tell them to quit hiding behind their grandfather.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =kAl5jucOgroXX&feature=rel ated
I realize u have a strong desire 2 b liked. Also, u like to marginalize an adversary by intimidation & insinuating that your opponent is not liked & nobody is on his side. Won't work with me,
'cause I don't care what these folks think, say, or do. That's one of most republican's liabilities. They want to be liked by their liberal adversaries.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Bellefontaine Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
what is not news, according to the liberal mind 26 min leave bellefontaine 12
OH Who do you support for Governor in Ohio in 2010? (Oct '10) 6 hr Anonymous of Indy 30,543
Labor Day (Aug '09) 7 hr magictrix 31
Football predictions 7 hr Swish 17
OSU gitz whipped Baby! (Sep '11) 7 hr Duke Dy-Nasty 408
vote NO on indian lake levey 9 hr Not that much 6
The Tea Party...Friend or Foe 9 hr Flip Flopper 128
Is Michelle Obama calling the Founding Fathers ... 9 hr Duke Dy-Nasty 53
What the hell are these little black bugs that ... (Oct '07) Fri Mrtzr 320
•••
•••
•••

Bellefontaine Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

Bellefontaine People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Bellefontaine News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Bellefontaine
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••