« Assorted | Main | Should libertarians side with the Democrats? »
One problem with the Republican Party?
Matt Yglesias reports:
Sebastian Mallaby observes of conservative/libertarian splits that "It's not just the values of the South that pose a problem. It is the region's appetite for government." In particular, "The most solidly red states in the nation tend also to be the most reliant on federal handouts -- farm subsidies, water projects and sundry other earmarks. It's hard to be the party of small government when you represent the communities that benefit most from big government."
Posted by Tyler Cowen on December 4, 2006 at 04:30 PM in Political Science | Permalink
Comments
In contrast, the Blue States are the chief region for restrictions on property development. It's a lot easier to build a housing tract or a golf course in the inland Republican areas than in the coastal Democratic areas.
Posted by: Steve Sailer at Dec 4, 2006 4:27:49 PM
Maybe states that receive more government funding than they pay in taxes should lose votes in Congress?
And the states that put more into the government coffers than they take out should gain votes in Congress...
I think California and New York only get about 60 cents in government funding for every dollar they pay in federal taxes...
Posted by: alphie at Dec 4, 2006 4:28:17 PM
By the way, a big reason that tax dollars flow from blue to red states on average is that red states are where the military bases are, simply because red states have only about 1/4 the population density (not even counting Alaska).
Posted by: Steve Sailer at Dec 4, 2006 8:50:45 PM
Another reason is the higher average income for Blue State residents puts them into higher tax brackets.
Red States also receive most of the disaster relief and farm subsidies the federal government provides.
Posted by: alphie at Dec 4, 2006 9:57:52 PM
The South does, in general, have lower state government spending, though. The Blue State residents have higher average incomes (and home values), which causes lots of government spending formulas to automatically penalize them.
The deduction for state income taxes encourages wealthy states to raise their state income taxes in order to keep more of their tax money "at home."
I think California and New York only get about 60 cents in government funding for every dollar they pay in federal taxes.
Yeah, but they just keep voting for more federal spending, via their reps. And *any* government spending is going to penalize them, based just on the higher incomes/higher cost of living.
Posted by: John Thacker at Dec 4, 2006 10:48:20 PM
Here's a 10 year old study from Harvard on this topic in the dreadful PDF format:
http://tinyurl.com/y9sapf
Posted by: alphie at Dec 4, 2006 11:52:32 PM
What an odd way to look at things. States don't receive farm subsidies, nor do states pay federal taxes. At least, last I checked.
More generally, I'm not sure how much there is to this. The statistics include retirement programs, so the proportion of elderly in a state (think AZ and FL) can drive this a bit. They also, as Steve points out, include military spending. And they include national infrastructure spending in places like Montana, which is still technically a "red" state while trending blue, and which is owned, as I understand it, entirely by the federal government and Ted Turner. Other than that, you're left with the disgraceful farm subsidies and the happenstance of determined poverty in Appalachia and the south, a problem which has long been the target of federal attention.
Posted by: Thomas at Dec 5, 2006 12:42:34 AM
PDF is a slightly less terrible format if you ditch Acrobat and use FoxIt Reader.
Posted by: Noumenon at Dec 5, 2006 1:05:47 AM
Southern states tend to be disproportionate
recipients of federal defense spending as well.
Posted by: Barkley Rosser at Dec 5, 2006 2:44:20 PM
uniformi sexy gratis femmina pelosissima gratis studentesse asiatica uomini sexiit lesbiche nere filmini hard collant vendita on line femmine lesbiche obese gratis vecchie signore sesso figa belle fighe gratis sesso sborra annunci travestiti foto amatoriali studentesse cazzoni enormi masturbazionedonne grasse zoccole spiate in bagno ragazze vergini sfondate
Posted by: www at Dec 6, 2006 8:02:25 AM
Steve -- what share of the blue states greater restrictions on property development is strictly a function of population density?
Posted by: spencer at Dec 6, 2006 9:17:10 AM
what share of the blue states greater restrictions on property development is strictly a function of population density?
Interesting question. Certainly the leftish states rank higher in population density, though Florida, Virginia, North Carolina, Indiana, Georgia, and Tennessee show up in the top 20.
But really average income drives the statistics about handouts. The retiree influence for Florida and Arizona is important for them.
Posted by: John Thacker at Dec 6, 2006 12:50:35 PM
Weight loss is easier than you think!
Posted by: adipex at Jan 28, 2009 7:13:15 PM
tiffany rings
tiffany earrings
tiffany necklaces
tiffany pendants
Tiffany Engagement Rings
Posted by: aion kina at Mar 20, 2009 11:39:38 PM
best-tutor.com
http://www.best-tutor.com
good site
Posted by: tutor at May 27, 2009 12:22:50 AM
