There are the giver nations. And the taker nations within the EU.
Sure. And that is going to happen within each STATE. but we are talking about sovereign countries that are feeding slugs like Greece, etc. That has to get old.That happens in the US as well, as well as any other state or country or provence. There are always areas that make more money and areas that need help.
Would you speak English damn it?!? Oh wait.with both sides being woolly.
Sure. And that is going to happen within each STATE. but we are talking about sovereign countries that are feeding slugs like Greece, etc. That has to get old.
California is bountiful as a producer of produce. We feed half the world. Silicon Valley, tourism, industry, etc. most of this map does not surprise me. But I am curious the source? And what is this based in? Federal dollars? GDP?
It's based on how much a state gets from the federal government vs how much they give. For example, the most dependent states will put in a dollar to the federal government and get a little over three dollars in return, while the "giver" states will put in a dollar and get less than a dollar in return. The idea is that the "giver" states prop up the "taker" states, because the "taker" states don't make enough money to fund everything they need while the giver states would have a surplus because they make more than they need. California and other states would have a lot more money if they weren't busy "feeding slugs" like Alabama, etc but it's seen as better for the collective whole.
The EU was designed to be similar to the United States, and in many way the United States acts like 50 countries, each with unique laws, customs, etc... Hence why it's the United States and not the United Provinces... We have a common central government that makes laws that apply everywhere, and we have a common currency, we allow free movement between states, but each state has their own police force, their own "military" (other than the National Guard, many states have their own State Defense Force which is completely separate) their own local government and make their own laws.. We used to have separate currencies before we adopted a uniform one. The EU wanted to be similar to that, mostly in order to maintain peace after WWI and WWII.
Exactly what I was thinking, re: Florida, Les. (Arizona for that matter) and no doubt Stu makes a killing at his place, but it's hard to believe it's enough to float that great economic engine called Oregon.Blue I need a better explanation because CA is a mess and is seemingly always facing massive budget issues.
Can this map be considered a strong source because I live in Florida and the only reason I can come up with for this state being in the purple is because of the amount of retirees receiving benefits. There is loads of money here and a pretty healthy economy.
I'm not sure how to make heads or tails out of that map.
#180. Dieter the BrockThis thread is he perfect example of why you should all move to Texas
http://www.becomingtexan.com/2015/03/179-reasons-texas-is-best-state.html?m=1
View attachment 14439
Blue I need a better explanation because CA is a mess and is seemingly always facing massive budget issues.
Can this map be considered a strong source because I live in Florida and the only reason I can come up with for this state being in the purple is because of the amount of retirees receiving benefits. There is loads of money here and a pretty healthy economy.
I'm not sure how to make heads or tails out of that map.
I am not an economist. (But I play one on TV) and while much of what you say is true, there are other dynamics involved. "States" don't have money. Except or until they confiscate it from the producers. (Tax payers).Map is good, there are better ones that show how close or far from a net 0 a state is, CA is 8th I believe. The California economy is actually doing well now, they're back to being the 6th largest (could move up to 5th with the Brexit) in the world, by far the largest in the United States, and is outpacing the US economy at this point. A few years ago it was struggling, but now it's doing pretty well. At any rate, the amount of money CA makes is absurd, so the state will almost always be a "net giver" state.
I believe Florida's economy relies heavily on tourism since it's the place most tourists visit in the world, which typically means a lot of service jobs that pay minimum wage. As the US economy improves, so should Florida, as tourism picks up. But with a lot of minimum wage jobs and a lot of retirees it probably makes it a net taker. Those who are making more than minimum wage and more than service industry are probably doing much better, but I don't really know details. I'm not an economist, so someone else would be better served to explain.
I am not an economist. (But I play one on TV) and while much of what you say is true, there are other dynamics involved. "States" don't have money. Except or until they confiscate it from the producers. (Tax payers).
There becomes an arrogance that takes over government, seeing all this wealth, like a leach sees an animal- cling, and suckle. It would take too long to list all I see. But suffice to say:
The great wealth of California, thanks to farms, computer firms, Hollywood, tourism, etc. "mask" the economic reality in California. The lefties love to use the word "sustainable" -usually related to organic food, or hemp, or something. But they don't have a clue how unsustainable their socialist dream is on the average citizen. Their top-heavy tax and spend system works for them, while they heap bricks on the useful idiots that continue to vote them back into office.
- I live in the Capitol city area of this fifth largest economy in the world. I work in the home improvement industry. My richest clients, consistently, are mid level state workers. Especially if one is married to another.
- Those thinking that the answer is to raise the minimum wage are misguided. It is an awesome way to raise the unemployment rate, though.
- Small and medium sized businesses still employ more people than large corporations. The unfunded mandates placed on these businesses KILL businesses, hurt low income people, (by raising the cost of living) and drive many of those surviving businesses to places like Nevada, Texas, and Arizona. ( :coach: "Thanks California!".......idiots. )
- The number of Ca. State workers grew exponentially as this state shifted so far to the left. Both in size, salary and benefits. It used to be that someone working in a profession (say an accountant) sacrificed a little bit in salary for the job security and benefits of working for the state. Now they make more money than in the private sector. And there is zero accoutability. (No pun intended). The inmates truly run the asylum.
I seem to have a knack for shutting threads down. :snicker: Just trying to keep it real. Sorry. Oh, and Cheers:cheers:@Roman Snow as someone who completely agrees with what you last said, I also have to echo what @bluecoconuts is saying here. You are going the route of turning this into a political left vs right thread. I like to talk politics as much as the next guy and probably more than most but we don't carry it over here.
Cheers and just say no to Hilary
I am not an economist. (But I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night)