Could this actually happen (possible debate)

[MrsNick]

I was and this is your opinion but not mine. CT does pay way more money out than they get back from Uncle Sam (a burb), but NYC only getting back 1%, sorry that is so far off. Please show me a link to back up your fact.

I am not speaking just about NYC but many cities and not all have to be this big.

I never said 1%. I said $1 back in federal $ for every $63 in federal dollars paid (also as I posted before, this figure included the whole metro area, not just NYC. This included metro area NY state, CT and NJ).

The figure came from an article in either the NY Times or Time magazine a long time ago. I think NY Times now charges for articles that far back; however, here is a link to an article by Forbes which says much of the same thing, but gives % rather than dollar figures, which was how the article I read a long time ago presented.

http://www.forbes.com/business/2005/11/02/taxes-amt-reform-cz_jn_1102beltway.html

Here are the first two paragraphs:
WASHINGTON, D.C. - The nine members of the President's Advisory Panel on Federal Tax Reform might want to avoid cocktail parties in wealthier enclaves of California, New York, New Jersey and Connecticut for a time.

As most residents of those high-tax, high-income, Democrat-leaning (i.e. Blue) states have heard by now, the panel's final report, delivered to the Treasury on Tuesday, called for repeal of the federal income tax deduction for state and local taxes. In 2002, residents of California and New York alone claimed 29% of all those deductions, while paying 22% of the federal income tax bill, according to a report by Kim Rueben of the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center. Red-state Texans and Floridians, by contrast, claimed just 5.4% of state and local tax deductions, while footing 13% of the federal tax bill in 2002.


Basically, this confirms the gist of my point, which is that Blue state pay more in state and local taxes than do Red states, and Blue states pay a much larger proportion of federal income tax.

 

[ead79]

First of all, congrats to everyone for keeping this great thread civil!

I see a trend in some of the posts which seem to hint that the south still has
a problem with what civil rights should be.

I've heard that the North actually has the same problems, but the south has the history which supports perpetuating the opinion.

Some even say that race relations are better in the South.

What are your thoughts?

P.S. I also have seen data which supports the statement that blue states send more $$ to Washington than the red states.

In terms of the racial relations issue, it depends a great deal on what area of the south you're in. I live in a suburb of Atlanta, and racial relations are for the most part pretty good. I'm not saying there is never friction, but in the city you're MUCH, MUCH less likely to see a confederate flag flying than you are in a rural area in Georgia. Plus, not everyone who flies a confederate flag is actually racist. Some see it as southern pride and do not acknowledge the racial overtones (of course, that's a whole other debate). In the area in which I live (a large suburb of Atlanta), people as a whole are sensitive and polite when it comes to the racial issue. While I do think that more overt racism happens in rural areas than larger cities, I can't see that Georgia would ever split from the USA over something like that.

As to your other point, I too have heard that racial relations aren't much better in the north than they are in the south. Many people feel that the racism is less overt in the north, but that it is equally as strong as any racism in the south. Sad indeed.

 

[The Mystery Machine]

Yea, I see it happening.
The states will get fed up with the government short changing them when it comes to infrastructure.
There is only so much you can put up with.

I think our public school system is certainly the first thing to be changed. Bill & Melinda Gates are knocking at that door.
Certainly they will shake things up in the coming years.

 

[mickeyfan2]

I never said 1%. I said $1 back in federal $ for every $63 in federal dollars paid (also as I posted before, this figure included the whole metro area, not just NYC. This included metro area NY state, CT and NJ).

The figure came from an article in either the NY Times or Time magazine a long time ago. I think NY Times now charges for articles that far back; however, here is a link to an article by Forbes which says much of the same thing, but gives % rather than dollar figures, which was how the article I read a long time ago presented.

http://www.forbes.com/business/2005/11/02/taxes-amt-reform-cz_jn_1102beltway.html

Here are the first two paragraphs:
WASHINGTON, D.C. - The nine members of the President's Advisory Panel on Federal Tax Reform might want to avoid cocktail parties in wealthier enclaves of California, New York, New Jersey and Connecticut for a time.

As most residents of those high-tax, high-income, Democrat-leaning (i.e. Blue) states have heard by now, the panel's final report, delivered to the Treasury on Tuesday, called for repeal of the federal income tax deduction for state and local taxes. In 2002, residents of California and New York alone claimed 29% of all those deductions, while paying 22% of the federal income tax bill, according to a report by Kim Rueben of the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center. Red-state Texans and Floridians, by contrast, claimed just 5.4% of state and local tax deductions, while footing 13% of the federal tax bill in 2002.


Basically, this confirms the gist of my point, which is that Blue state pay more in state and local taxes than do Red states, and Blue states pay a much larger proportion of federal income tax.

The article is about AMT. There are many high earners in blue state that will be effected by this.

I am still waiting for you link that tells me how NYC pays $63 and gets back $1. I have been and still am talking about city/surrounding area within a state. The state link posted by another posters shows low numbers of about 50% up to high of 200% (excluding DC).

No need to discuss anymore here. This is getting to far OT.

 

[MrsNick]

Regarding NYC sending more tax $ upstate than it receives back (can't display more without paying for the NY Times article):
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Political Memo; The Upstate Economy, the Problem That Still Plagues Politicians and Their Promises


*Please Note: Archive articles do not include photos, charts or graphics. More information. June 11, 2006, Sunday
By SAM ROBERTS (NYT); Metropolitan Desk
Late Edition - Final, Section 1, Page 41, Column 1, 1184 words
CORRECTION APPENDED

DISPLAYING FIRST 50 OF 1184 WORDS -New York Democrats at their party's state convention last month repeatedly invoked the same theme: the need to reinvigorate the economy upstate, where ailing cities like Buffalo and now Rochester contrast starkly with New York City and its shimmering prosperity. But the Democrats -- convened, not coincidentally, in Buffalo...

Correction: June 15, 2006, Thursday Because of an editing error, a Political Memo article on Sunday, about failed political efforts to improve upstate New York's economy, referred incorrectly to an accomplishment by a Democrat, the late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, that helped his two Democratic successors make inroads with upstate voters, including Republicans. He was able to convince them that New York City and its suburbs were already sending more money to Albany than they received, not that the city and its suburbs should start doing so.

 

[Chicago526]

I've always loved the map I'm posting below. If you look at a normal red-blue map of the US, it looks like amost all of the US is "red". In reality, the red states have a great number of blue voters, but because the red's are the majority (often a slim one at that) they appear red. Same with the "blue" states, many have a fare number of "red" voters.

In this map, shades of purple are used in areas with a mix of red and blue voters. This more acuratly represents the true political geographic mix of voters.

While there are real ideological divides between red and blue voters, the reds and blues are not seperated geographicly enough, I feel, to support a state or several states having strong enough local support for a split from the Federal government.

http://www-personal.umich.edu/~mejn/election

 

[BuckNaked]

I am still waiting for you link that tells me how NYC pays $63 and gets back $1. I have been and still am talking about city/surrounding area within a state. The state link posted by another posters shows low numbers of about 50% up to high of 200% (excluding DC).

No need to discuss anymore here. This is getting to far OT.

Perhaps OT, but relevent when discussing what could cause a state to leave (paying way more than they get back). Based on the chart provided earlier, it looks like NY actually gets $49.77 back for every $63 it sends in. As for the city itself, no idea, but $1/$63 sounds a bit off.

 

[paigevz]

How would splinter states protect themselves? Or do you mean a flip in powers, more than a break off? Who gets the Navy?

I think logistics will prevent this, not the people of the US pulling together in times of crisis.

Also as another Northerner living in the South I do see a great divide. I am offended by the State pledge in Texas, .

My son studied the Civil War (or the War of the Norths aggression) this year in school and I found myself filling in a lot of gaps. I was really shocked at what they were and were not teaching him. They did not even tell him what Sam Houston did when the South wrote asking Texas to join on their side of the war. (He burned the letter and said it was treason).

Fed $ spent per $ of tax by state

ETA: I have to run and did not research that link at all, but it has always been well known that some states pay and some states get Fed Tax $.

I agree with your first two paragraphs.

What in the Texas pledge offends you? It seems very straightforward to me, and pretty much just echoes the National pledge.

My son studied the Alamo this year, and I thought his teacher's approach to it was very balanced and honest about all that happened.

OP: Great topic, I never thought about this one, and I've already learned a lot just on two pages!

 

[paigevz]

Yea, I see it happening.
The states will get fed up with the government short changing them when it comes to infrastructure.
There is only so much you can put up with.

I think our public school system is certainly the first thing to be changed. Bill & Melinda Gates are knocking at that door.
Certainly they will shake things up in the coming years.

Good. I'm a teacher and I would LOVE to see some constructive change besides just a bunch of complaining about and to the ones who aren't making the rules!

 

[Kimberly]

Probably will not happen. While americans stand fiercely divided on many issues (abortion, euthanasia, and stem cell research for example), we are united by our own common interest. The US has a greater chance of going to war with Canada than it stands a chance of it dividing itself.

 

[marybet]

I hope you don't think that I believe racism doesn't exist, 'cause it does. I've always believed that racism exists...I just didn't think that there were groups that still thought that blacks 'should know their place', that's just wrong.

Think how I felt when I was asked how we treat our blacks in the North. I just didn't know what to say. I did tell the woman who said she liked it better when they knew their place that I thougt their place was where ever they wanted it to be.

I guess living in a small town in Ohio I just didn't see the type of behavior that exist in the South and I was shocked by it. I really don't know how you change the mindset. The parents pass it on to their children, it is the younger people that surprise me the most. I don't quite know how to pharse it, but shouldn't they know better by now?

 

[LuvDuke]

Probably will not happen. While americans stand fiercely divided on many issues (abortion, euthanasia, and stem cell research for example), we are united by our own common interest. The US has a greater chance of going to war with Canada than it stands a chance of it dividing itself.

Believe this one or not, abortion rights is not an issue over which this country is fiercely divided. Seventy-seven percent of the American public favor some abortion rights with 24% favoring no restrictions.

http://www.pollingreport.com/abortion.htm

Seventy percent of the American public favor allowing a doctor to assist a dying patient in ending their life.

http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/index.asp?PID=561

Over 60% of the American public favor stem cell research and nearly 54% have no problem with using discarded embryos.

http://www.pollingreport.com/science.htm

Mainstream America favors some abortion rights, favors some doctor assisted suicide, and favors stem cell research. Geez, maybe there's more common ground than I thought.

Which begs the questions why is the mainstream allowing the fringes to set and run the debate and why does reality seem to differ from person to person?

And maybe that is what's causing the great divide. Not the actual issues, but the ones in power (political, corporate, radio, television,etc.) who have a vested interest in keeping the pot stirred and the rabble roused.

Maybe those powers that be have a vested interest in presenting the mainstream as the fringe and the fringe as traditional values?

 

[marybet]

LuvDuke what a great post. It would be nice if more people were aware of those facts. I think you may be right about the powers that be keeping the pot stirred.

 

[WebmasterMaryJo]

I think that although Americans may have differences of opinions, ideals, and economic status - these things wouldn't be enough to divide our country.

What is beginning to concern me are the large numbers of people entering our country and not assimilating, but keeping the culture of their former country and language. Many of these people come here, but feel no allegiance to this country, nor do they have any desire to become a part of America. They raise their flags and stomp on ours.

I had a conversation with someone who didn't speak English, and I asked him why he didn't bother to learn it (he had indicated no desire), and he responded that he was only here temporarily and then was going home to El Salvador. I asked him how long he had lived here and he said 13 years. 13 years in the United States, sending a good chunk of his money to El Salvador, and no intention of becoming "American." I see people like him, and it does worry me.

 

[Planogirl]

What in the Texas pledge offends you? It seems very straightforward to me, and pretty much just echoes the National pledge.

I'm wondering the same thing. I can't imagine anything offensive in the pledge.

 

[CapeCodTenor]

What is beginning to concern me are the large numbers of people entering our country and not assimilating, but keeping the culture of their former country and language. Many of these people come here, but feel no allegiance to this country, nor do they have any desire to become a part of America. They raise their flags and stomp on ours.

This concerns me as well.

 

[LuvDuke]

LuvDuke what a great post. It would be nice if more people were aware of those facts. I think you may be right about the powers that be keeping the pot stirred.

Thank you. Sometimes what we think is a divisive issue is, in reality, nothing more than than the "tail wagging the dog". The debate over abortion, doctor assisted suicide, and stem cell research is over: The American has overwhelmingly decided.

It is the powers-that-be who stoke the fires of the minority to squeeze out a 1-vote majority and then declare total victory leaving those of us in the mainstream to ponder just what the hell is happening. That's what's ultimately going to destroy this country.

Vigorous, and sometimes downright contentious, debate does not cause problems in an open society. What causes problems is when the minority is exploited for political gain without any attempt at consensus because that consensus does not end up with the desired result.