E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Eric Miller / AP file
Minnesota, which spends the 15th highest level per pupil, made the list of states trying to spread wealth among its citizens.
By Michael B. Sauter, Charles B. Stockdale and Ashley C. Allen, 24/7 Wall St.
The Occupy movement has brought economic inequality to the headlines. Occupy protesters around the country have labeled themselves the 99 percent, in contrast to the wealthiest 1 percent. While this has captured the public’s attention, differences in wealth have always existed, and states have tried to level the playing field by redistributing money through education spending, unemployment benefits, health care, welfare, and other means.
24/7 Wall St. examined government spending by state in a number of categories to identify those that give the most and least in money and benefits to their residents. Our analysis has found that states that provide the most services and benefits have high income inequality. In order to finance these programs, the states that offer the most to their residents also have among the highest tax burdens in the country. While all income levels benefit from government assistance, the poor and the dispossessed benefit the most, in the form of welfare, Medicare, and unemployment insurance.
Tax burden refers to the average amount a person pays in taxes as a percentage of his or her income. The Tax Foundation calculates each state’s tax burden by taking the total amount paid by the state’s residents in taxes, and dividing it by the total income of the state’s residents. Eight of the ten states that are most generous are among the top fifteen states with the highest tax burdens. New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut are all included on the list and also fill the top three slots for largest tax burdens in the country.
24/7 Wall St.: The richest (and poorest) states
Income inequality measures how evenly wealth is distributed among residents of an area. Income inequality is high when a few people make a great deal and many make far less. Six of the ten states that are most generous are in the top 15 states for highest rates of income inequality. The three states with the greatest inequality in the country — New York, Connecticut, and Massachusetts — are among the most generous. Many of the states giving the least, such as Idaho and Indiana, fall on the other end of the spectrum for income inequality.
It also happens that the states that spend the most on their residents have particularly high costs of living. While it may be that state governments simply give more because costs are higher, the difference in spending does reflect the entire situation. In many cases the most generous states also provide benefits for longer periods of time, such as unemployment and cash assistance for needy families. Nine of the ten states on the list are within the top 15 for highest costs of living. and seven of the ten least giving states are within the bottom 15 for cost of living.
24/7 Wall St. used the percent of former weekly wages covered by state unemployment insurance to rank unemployment benefits by state, using data from The National Employment Law Project. The amount each state spends on education per student, including teacher salaries, as well as data on income inequality, measured by the Gini coefficient, comes from the Census Bureau. Medicaid spending per recipient is from The Urban Institute and Kaiser Commission on Medicaid and the Uninsured. Medicare spending per recipient is from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. 24/7 ranked the average amount each state employee receives in pension benefits per year using data from the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College on defined benefit plans. Data on the average number of months of benefits received and the average monthly amount of cash assistance from Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), a welfare program that provides cash assistance to American families with dependent children, was obtained from the Administration for Children and Families. Cost of living data is from the Missouri Economic Research and Information Center.
States doing the most to spread the wealth
10. California
- Average pension benefits: $24,398 (8th highest)
- Total per pupil spending: $9,657 (22nd lowest)
- Medicaid payments per beneficiary: $3,367 (the lowest)
- Weekly wages covered by unemployment benefits: 30.3 pecent (11th lowest)
- Number of months of TANF received: 42.4 (7th highest)
- Average TANF cash assistance per month: $537 (2nd highest)
California provides a large amount of cash assistance to those in need. Recipients of TANF in the state receive $537 per month — the second largest amount in the country — and for 42.4 months— the seventh most months. California residents have one of the highest tax burdens in the country. The state also has the seventh highest level of income inequality.
24/7 Wall St.: The States Where the Most Unemployed Could Lose Benefits
9. Minnesota
- Average pension benefits: $16,304 (17th lowest)
- Total per pupil spending: $11,098 (15th highest)
- Medicaid payments per beneficiary: $8,435 (2nd highest)
- Weekly wages covered by unemployment benefits: 40.7 percent (12th highest)
- Nunber of months of TANF received: 40 (10th highest)
- Average TANF cash assistance per month: $348 (19th most)
As of 2008, Medicaid enrollees in Minnesota received the second largest amount in benefits in the country. However, the state has cut outlays to the program in the 2012-2013 budget, meaning the state’s ranking in this category may soon change. Residents of the state have to pay a very large amount in taxes. The average citizen of Minnesota pays 10.3 percent of their income in state and local taxes, which is the seventh largest amount in the country.
8. Alaska
- Average pension benefits: $18,632 (25th lowest)
- Total per pupil spending: $15,552 (3rd highest)
- Medicaid payments per beneficiary: $7,453 (6th highest)
- Weekly wages covered by unemployment benefits: 27.0 percent (5th lowest)
- Number of months of TANF received: 37.3 (14th highest)
- Average TANF cash assistance per month: $602 (the highest)
Alaskans have the lowest tax burden in the country, paying just 6.3 percent of their income in state and local taxes. According to the Tax Foundation, “Before the Trans-Alaska pipeline was finished in 1977, taxpayers in Alaska bore the second-highest tax burden in the country. By 1980, with oil tax revenue pouring in, Alaska repealed its personal income tax and started sending out checks instead.” The state also doesn’t levy personal income tax or sales tax. Still, it manages to spend the third largest amount per pupil each year, provide the sixth largest amount in Medicaid per beneficiary, and give the largest amount in monthly TANF assistance in the country.
7. Connecticut
- Average pension benefits: $26,622 (4th highest)
- Total per pupil spending: $14,531 (6th highest)
- Medicaid payments per beneficiary: $7,442 (7th highest)
- Weekly wages covered by unemployment benefits: 29.2 percent (8th lowest)
- Number of months of TANF received: 26.7 (17th lowest)
- Average TANF cash assistance per month: $413 (11th highest)
Connecticut has the highest per capita income in the country. Its residents also pay more than $5,000 a year on average in state and local taxes — the highest amount in the U.S. As a result, residents have the third highest tax burden in the country. In return, Connecticuters receive above average benefits. State employees who receive their pensions through the Connecticut State Employees Retirement System have the fourth highest average pension benefits. Students have the sixth highest amount spent on them. The state also has the fourth highest cost of living, and the second highest rate of income inequality.
6. Hawaii
- Average pension benefits: $22,680 (10th highest)
- Total per pupil spending: $12,400 (11th highest)
- Medicaid payments per beneficiary: $5,261 (21st lowest)
- Weekly wages covered by unemployment benefits: 54.3 percent (the highest)
- Number of months of TANF received: 46.7 (the highest)
- Average TANF cash assistance per month: $518 (3rd highest)
Hawaii, on average, covers 54.3 percent of workers’ previous weekly wages through unemployment benefits. This is the highest rate in the country. The state also provides, on average, the greatest number of months of TANF benefits, and the third highest average amount of cash assistance. Part of the reason for this is that Hawaii has — by a substantial margin— the highest cost of living in the country. The state also receives one of the largest amounts of federal funding per capita in the country. This is partly due to defense, but also because of its high rates of health and human services payments.
5. Pennsylvania
- Average pension benefits: $20,662 (15th highest)
- Total per pupil spending: $12,512 (10th highest)
- Medicaid payments per beneficiary: $6,937 (11th highest)
- Weekly wages covered by unemployment benefits: 39.4 percent (17th highest)
- Number of months of TANF received: 42 (8th highest)
- Average TANF cash assistance per month: $322 (25th highest)
Pennsylvania ranks high in a number of categories, but is not especially exceptional in any. It spends a large amount on education, health care, public pensions, and welfare. As a result, it has the tenth highest tax burden in the country, with residents spending an average of 10.1 percent of their income in state and local taxes.
4. New York
- Average pension benefits: $17,459 (19th lowest)
- Total per pupil spending: $18,126 (the highest)
- Medicaid payments per beneficiary: $9,057 (the highest)
- Weekly wages covered by unemployment benefits: 26.9 percent (2nd lowest)
- Number of months of TANF received: 43.9 (4th highest)
- Average TANF cash assistance per month: $499 (6th highest)
New York spends more than $18,100 per student on education each year, which is more than any other state in the nation. Approximately $12,500 of this is spent on teacher salaries and benefits alone. The state’s Medicaid payments per beneficiary of $9,057 is the largest in the country, and more than $600 than the state that spends the second most. New York has the absolute highest rate of income inequality in the country. It also has the second largest state and local tax burden, and the third highest cost of living.
3. New Jersey
- Average pension benefits: $16,817 (18th lowest)
- Total per pupil spending: $16,271 (2nd highest)
- Medicaid payments per beneficiary: $7,985 (4th highest)
- Weekly wages covered by unemployment benefits: 37.2 percent (25th highest)
- Number of months of TANF received: 40.4 (9th highest)
- Average TANF cash assistance per month: $325 (21st highest)
New Jersey residents have access to exceptional amounts of health care benefits. Medicaid beneficiaries receive the fourth largest amount in the country. And those who receive Medicare benefits, which is solely the fiscal responsibility of the federal government, receive the third largest amount. New Jersey also spends the second largest amount on education on a per student basis. Only 4 percent of New Jersey’s education budget derives from the federal government, with revenues split evenly between state and local governments. Unfortunately, New Jersey residents possess the largest tax burden in the country — nearly twice that of Alaska.
2. Massachusetts
- Average pension benefits: $25,596 (5th highest)
- Total per pupil spending: $14,118 (7th highest)
- Medicaid payments per beneficiary: $7,020 (10th highest)
- Weekly wages covered by unemployment benefits: 36.1 percent (22nd lowest)
- Number of months of TANF received: 36.2 (16th highest)
- Average TANF cash assistance per month: $500 (5th highest)
Massachusetts has the third highest rate of income inequality in country. However, the states offers a number of above average benefits to address this issue. The state provides the fifth highest monthly amount in cash assistance for families enrolled in TANF in the country. The state also spends the seventh greatest amount on education, resulting in what many consider to be one of the best K-12 education systems in the country. Additionally, residents covered under the Massachusetts State Employees Retirement System receive the fifth highest amount in average benefits.
1. Rhode Island
- Average pension benefits: $25,571 (6th highest)
- Total per pupil spending: $13,707 (8th highest)
- Medicaid payments per beneficiary: $8,208 (3rd highest)
- Weekly wages covered by unemployment benefits: 45.9 percent (2nd highest)
- Number of months of TANF received: 46.5 (2nd highest)
- Average TANF cash assistance per month: $417 (10th highest)
Rhode Island performs exceptionally well in all of the “generous” state metrics. It provides Medicaid beneficiaries with the third largest amount in payments. It provides the unemployed with almost 46 percent of their previous weekly wages — the second highest rate. Those receiving cash assistance through TANF, on average, can receive benefits for the second longest period among all states. Of course, taxes must be relatively high to fund these programs. The state has the fifth highest state-local tax burden in the country.
States doing the least to spread the wealth
10. Texas
- Average pension benefits: $18,828 (25th highest)
- Total per pupil spending: $8,540 (9th lowest)
- Medicaid payments per beneficiary: $4,667 (10th lowest)
- Weekly wages covered by unemployment benefits: 36.0 percent (21st lowest)
- Number of months of TANF received: 30.3 (22nd lowest)
- Average TANF cash assistance per month: $195 (6th lowest)
Texas provides among the lowest average amount in monthly cash assistance to families receiving TANF benefits. It has the tenth lowest amount in Medicaid payments per beneficiary. It also spends the ninth lowest amount on education on a per pupil basis. Residents of the state have one of the lowest state and local tax burdens in the country, paying just 7.9 percent of their income. The state also has the fourth lowest cost of living in the nation.
24/7 Wall St.: The best- and worst-run states in America
9. Florida
- Average pension benefits: $19,777 (19th highest)
- Total per pupil spending: $8,760 (14th lowest)
- Medicaid payments per beneficiary: $4,574 (6th lowest)
- Weekly wages covered by unemployment benefits: 29.5 percent (9th lowest)
- Number of months of TANF received: 21.8 (9th lowest)
- Average TANF cash assistance per month: $233 (13th lowest)
Florida has one of the lowest per-beneficiary payout rates for Medicaid in the country. Conversely, it has one of the highest rates for Medicare, which aids those aged 65 years or older and is solely funded by the federal government. The state also provides relatively low unemployment benefits and TANF benefits.
8. Indiana
- Average pension benefits: $8,837 (the lowest)
- Total per pupil spending: $9,369 (17th lowest)
- Medicaid payments per beneficiary: $5,136 (18th lowest)
- Weekly wages covered by unemployment benefits: 40.1 percent (13th highest)
- Number of months of TANF received: 24.8 (13th lowest)
- Average TANF cash assistance per month: $203 (8th lowest)
The greatest detriment to Indiana’s ranking is its pension system. The average benefits for a public servant enrolled in the Indiana Public Employees' Retirement Fund is $8,837, the lowest amount in the country. Although Indiana, unlike many states, strives to make its full pension payments each year, it keeps payments small. According to the New York Times, “An employee earning $30,000 a year retires after 25 years with an annual pension of less than $10,000.” The state also provides a relatively low amount in average monthly cash assistance for TANF beneficiaries. The cost of living in Indiana is, however, relatively low.
7. South Carolina
- Average pension benefits: $17,467 (19th lowest)
- Total per pupil spending: $9,277 (16th lowest)
- Medicaid payments per beneficiary: $4,658 (8th lowest)
- Percent of weekly wages covered by unemployment benefits: 33.5 percent (16th lowest)
- Number of months of TANF received: 32.4 (20th highest)
- Average TANF cash assistance per month: $172 (4th lowest)
South Carolina scores worse than average in every metric of generosity we looked at. The worst of these were Medicaid and cash assistance to the poor. South Carolina paid out just $4,658 per beneficiary last year for Medicaid, the eighth lowest amount in the U.S. Needy families received just $172 on average from TANF, the fourth lowest dollar amount in the country.
6. Arizona
- Average pension benefits: $19,056 (23rd highest)
- Total per pupil spending: $7,813 (3rd lowest)
- Medicaid payments per beneficiary: $4,701 (14th lowest)
- Weekly wages covered by unemployment benefits: 26.2 percent (the lowest)
- Number of months of TANF received: 35.4 (18th highest)
- Average TANF cash assistance per month: $270 (18th lowest)
Arizona’s state and local tax burden is significantly lower than the national average. It also spends less than the national average in a number of areas. When it comes to education, the state spends the third lowest amount per pupil in the country. On top of this, the Arizona Senate recently cut $200 million from K-12 education. The state also covers the smallest amount of weekly wages for the unemployed. Additionally, the average weekly unemployment benefit is
$213, the fourth lowest amount in the country.
5. Alabama
- Average pension benefits: $19,098 (22nd highest)
- Total per pupil spending: $8,870 (15th lowest)
- Medicaid payments per beneficiary: $3,931 (2nd lowest)
- Weekly wages covered by unemployment benefits: 27.7 percent (6th lowest)
- Number of months of TANF received: 30.8 (25th lowest)
- Average TANF cash assistance per month: $197 (7th lowest)
In Alabama, the average Medicaid beneficiary receives just $3,931 each year. This is the second lowest amount in the country. In contrast, New York pays more than double that, or $9,057 per patient. According to the Missouri Economic Research and Information Center, the relative cost of health care in the state also happens to be the lowest in the country, lessening the need for public assistance in this area. The state also provides just $197 for the average needy family through TANF, the seventh-lowest payout in the U.S.
4. Oklahoma
- Average pension benefits: $15,215 (13th lowest)
- Total per pupil spending: $7,885 (4th lowest)
- Medicaid payments per beneficiary: $4,666 (9th lowest)
- Weekly wages covered by unemployment benefits: 39.2 percent (21st highest)
- Number of months of TANF received: 27.4 (18th lowest)
- Average TANF cash assistance per month: $189 (5th lowest)
Oklahoma spends the fourth smallest amount on education per pupil. It also pays the third least amount in employee benefits for those in the education system and the second least amount in teachers’ salaries to the number of students in the state. In addition to this, Oklahoma pays the fifth lowest amount in average monthly cash payments for TANF recipients and the ninth lowest amount in Medicaid benefits for those enrolled in the program. Perhaps not surprising, the state has the second lowest cost of living in the country.
3. Idaho
- Average pension benefits: $16,088 (15th lowest)
- Total per pupil spending: $7,092 (2nd lowest)
- Medicaid payments per beneficiary: $5,685 (25th highest)
- Weekly wages covered by unemployment benefits: 39.3 percent (20th highest)
- Number of months of TANF received: 8 (the lowest)
- Average TANF cash assistance per month: $302 (22nd lowest)
The state of Idaho spends just over $7,000 per pupil in a given year. This is the second lowest rank in the country. Idaho provides below average cash assistance through TANF, and recipients only average eight months of eligibility, by far the shortest period in the U.S. As measured by the Census Bureau’s GINI coefficient, Idaho has the eighth best income equality in the country.
2. Tennessee
- Average pension benefits: $13,145 (6th lowest)
- Total per pupil spending: $7,897 (5th lowest)
- Medicaid payments per beneficiary: $4,687 (12th lowest)
- Weekly wages covered by unemployment benefits: 28.9 percent (7th lowest)
- Number of months of TANF received: 38 (13th highest)
- Average TANF cash assistance per month: $167 (3rd lowest)
Tennessee has the eleventh lowest per capita income in the country and state residents pay just $1,851 in taxes — the second lowest amount in the U.S. in state and local taxes. This means the state has one of the lowest tax burdens in the country. The state spends relatively little on education, unemployment benefits, TANF welfare benefits, and pension benefits. But Tennessee also has the lowest cost of living in the country.
24/7 Wall St.: Ten brands that will disappear in 2012
1. Arkansas
- Average pension benefits: $12,009 (5th lowest)
- Total per pupil spending: $8,712 (11th lowest)
- Medicaid payments per beneficiary: $4,413 (4th lowest)
- Weekly wages covered by unemployment benefits: 41.1 percent (11th highest)
- Number of months of TANF received: 11.2 (2nd lowest)
- Average TANF cash assistance per month: $147 (the lowest)
Arkansas has the second lowest median household income in the country, at just $38,571. Despite this, the state is one of the least generous, especially when it comes to assistance for the poor. The state gives just $147 per TANF recipient, the lowest in the country. And the average poor family receiving cash assistance is only eligible for 11.2 months, the second shortest period in the U.S.
Leave a Comment:
Since when has it become the responsibility of the states to spread wealth though they do it all the time. Helping people out during rough times is one thing but taking what i worked hard to accumulate and giving it to someone who doesn't is a completely different thing.
It's because "Robin Hood" is currently the popular idea for our economic system.
Now compare the states that do the most to "spread the wealth" to those which are the closest to going broke and will want a hand-out from the rest of the country. Harold is right - where is it written "you are entitled to what I have worked for"?
Harold, I guess you paid to build that road in front of your house, or for the highway you drive to work on. My point is we live in a shared system, a duel economy of quasi capitalism, and socialism and it's worked well for this country, and has made us the envy of the world. Our commons, the streets you and I drive to work on, the electric grid that supplies electricity to your home, the water and sewer systems that allows companies to produce, and people to work are used by everyone.and Without them or with out the shared contribution of everyone paying for them in one way or another, through income taxes and or sales taxes we would not have those resources. Your ability to work hard, and accumulate wealth is not totally contributed to you, we've all in an indirect way helped you to prosper.
Money circulating throughout an economy is a good thing, either through work, pension payments, social benefit payments, it keeps an economy healthy. European countries that have implemented austerity measures are realizing some of the lowest GDP growth in their respective histories. Cutting away economic activity by cutting away spending may send them on a path they may not be able to change. My suggestion, see the big picture, and stay away from the I did it all by myself mindset, and the Hell with everyone else, it just doesn't work that way!
You are so right. The welfare of your neighbor does affect your welfare. I do not mind paying more taxes so that people who need it get assistance. I realize their are people who take advantage of the system; but I would say corporations are even worse - getting states to fight with each other over who is going to give them the biggest tax break. As to the person who commented on states going broke - the blue states (usually the ones with the best social programs) pay more in to the federal government than they get back. Red state residents (those with less generous social programs) get more money back from the federal government than they pay in - so let us get our story straight about who is supporting whom.
I disagree with "spread the wealth" mentality as well. The wealthy became wealthy not by anyones "donation" or "volunteerism", so no .. the roads and facilities the rich enjoy were earned by them fair and square.
What's broken is the economic system such that the wealthy can easily do both: protect their investments when needed and maximize profits when possible. Those in the mid and lower incomes cannot do this as easy.
When times are good, from rich to poor all prosper, during tough times only the mid and lower classes suffer as they can't do much to change their situation. That's the problem.
Bush's tax breaks didn't work coz the wealthy took advantage of it without fulfilling the original intention: encourage the wealthy to invest their money back into the US system
The rich has a tight lid on their money: money only goes out if they know it can make more money, and money is quickly pulled back in if there's possibility of loss. There is nothing wrong with this behavior, can you blame them for being smart?
So the result is during good times the rich get richer and during hard times the rich stays rich. What should be done is regulate laws that contradict this behavior. I suggest tax breaks given to expire if investments are pulled and tax breaks only offered during tough times.
Just like the Federal Reserves determine bank interest rates, they should also dictate investment tax rates and tax breaks just alike. This gives the Federal reserves more power to properly control the economy.
Harold, I agree with you, however the Govrnor of the State of California and the spending party Democrats who have controlled the legislature for some time are enjoining the Obama class warefare battle to attempt to balance the budget.
Yep, Governor Moonbeam wants to tax the rich, those making over $250K annual, to support programs that currently are unsustainable: entitlement, schools, rapid rail, public service UNIONS, and various departments, agencies and regulatory groups which have taken this once great state to near bankruptcy.
As Jerry states, California needs revenues to survive. While this statement is made, the legislators provided their staffs with an average of 23% merit pay increases; the legislature, who receives a high salary and $143 day expenses, bills the taxpayers for lunches while battling the budget. To decrease the budget by 6%, they increased expenses 10%!
The regulatory agencies continue to stiffle new business development by imposing regulations that are absolutely mind-blowing, turning off the water to the valley farmers due to a minnow with a life cycle of less than 3 weeks, among others.
No wonder business is leaving the state for NV and TX. Feel good you don't live here.
Inequality vs generous services. I wonder which is cause and which is effect. This list also seems very similar to the "best/worst managed states" list.
@ “””Matt-3468366”””
"Robin Hood" U mean CHINAHOOD is the way of today! THEIR MAKING EVER-FING-THING!!!!!!!!
I wouldn't care if I were taxed at 50% as long as necessities were covered, Health care, dental, elderly care, education, it would be better than worrying about being bankrupted by private corporations on a daily basis.
Terran
You are full of it. Guess you haven't gone to Europe or Canada lately. That is socialism. A Dr. can go to school 6+ years and make less than a good waiter here in those countries.
I don't know where you are from but I pay for those roads being built, the highways, my gas, water, electric etc... Guess I'm paying for your electric etc so you can share them. Guess that's why everything has doubled over the last 4 years...
I don't get any handouts and only the poor and lazy do. I pay property tax, gas tax, federal income tax, sales tax and on and on. It must be nice to be a lazy a##, not work, not pay taxes and get everything handed to you. Myself, I'd rather work, stay in shape which is a benefit to working and being active and use what I make to spend how I want instead of giving it to a bunch of socialistic, lazy a##'s laying on their backsides doing nothing but raising my taxes!
California’s one of the top states in socialist behavior and they are broke and can’t keep up all their programs because of it. Their jobs are overpaid, housing/land is over priced, they give services to all aliens including education, healthcare and food and how long do you think any one entity can keep that up without reaping the consequences?
If there was less bloated government and they spent the money on things they were suppose to instead of stealing from the middle class and giving to the lazy, the lazy would be working and I'd have more of MY money that I worked for.
Programs should be in place ONLY for a temporary solution, not a perm one...
x
Sorry for multiple posts
OK, I quit. Can't get it to post where I want it to.
Income inequality is a GOOD thing. Without income inequality, there is NO motivation to do ANYTHING. Look at how much China accomplished BEFORE they allowed capitalism (although limited) to occur. These Occupy folks haven't the slightest clue what they want. And just like in the 60s, the media is glorifying the escapades of a very small minority to make the sheep think it's a massive movement.
Yes, look at the monopoly game. Income/Property inequality is a good thing. When someone has all the money and the property they win! Hip, hip, hooray! Then what happens?
Terran (or should I say Elizabeth Warren) - No one (including Harold) said that they minded paying taxes to pay for the commons as you call them - roads, electric grid, sewer system, etc... It is clear that everyone benefits from these systems and these systems are needed to provide for the economic system we have. I believe, if you look at the data, that the "rich" and "corporations" pay a much larger percentage for these commons - so far so good. It is also agreed that money circulating in the economy is a good thing. The catch comes when the government continues to feel that they can spend your money better than you can (because you have too much of it) and when they feel compelled to "help" others by taking money from some and giving it to others (creating dependency). Supporting social safety nets is a common good and should be supported by everyone's taxes. Our society however is becoming more and more dependent on what were designed to be temporary or supplemental help (SS, Food Stamps, unemployment.....) not less dependent. As a result the government just keeps going back to the well (tax more) to support these programs. The Europeans are seeing their GDP shrink because you can't spend money on what you want to (ie: continue the status quo), have debt well above 100% of GDP, expect people to continue to loan you money and pay down debt at the same time. When you work yourself into a corner (too much debt) you run out of options - borrowing more money to grow GDP comes off the table. You have to cut spending and it hurts! With $15T in debt and deficits growing, we are supposed to be de-leveraging by being fiscally responsible, not releveraging our entitlements by taking more from the "rich". Everything is good until you run out of other people's money..... and try spending what you have wisely before you come asking for more and more and more with no plan to solve the problem.
He He...What happens? Game over....
Why do so many welfare recipients come to California? Just look at the $521/mo welfare cash and for nearly 4 years. Why is Calif bankrupt for nearly 15 years? Let me count the ways:
1) corrupt and bloated State government bureaucracy.
2) free state university to illegal alien students after K12, also free to all illegals.
3) special interests living high off of government contracts: labor unions of teachers, cops, and fire.
4) local governments and corrupt politicians rip-ing off the system: City of Bell, Maywood, Cudahy, Montebello, Vernon, etc
5) Generous entitlement programs
To fund all of these perversities, Calif taxes the day-light out of business and workers. Onerous and numerous regulations are passed in the name of safety when in reality they are revenue enhancement tools. Consequently, people and business are abandoning Calif. The cycle only exacerbate the current financial crisis.
The last person leaving Calif should lock the door.
Commies are running the media so it is no surprise they want to push this idea of spreading other peoples money around.
The whole spread the wealth matra exists right now for one reason, IMO, and that is to find someone else to blame for the failures of this country INSTEAD of those who are in charge of the policies that created the mess we are in. One of Alinsky's "pillars" is to target an enemy, personalize them, and then go on the attack. That is exactly what we see BIG TIME in this administration... Here is a short list of people who are to blame for all the ills us:
Notably absent from the administation's list?
If you followed the world out to Obama's utopian situation, everyone would work for the government and draw a high wage, no one would actually produce anything, and we would borrow every penny we distribute.
They refer to it as spreading the wealth when the reality is that this wealth, as they call it, is consumed without benefit and requires ever more. This is a totally non-productive disposal of resources that only results in eventual bankruptcy for those states.
I should qualify the "non-productive" disposal of this wealth. It buys votes.
It's so funny and sad at the same time how we, the well off totally disregard the "regular people" of whom we've stepped on and manipulated to get our wealth. And we all know that no one reaches the upper levels of the income world without screwing a few people over. I know, I've done it and I'm doing it everyday. Nothing happens in this world until a sale is made and a sale reduced down is nothing but manipulation. I'm pretty nervous about the direction the country is headed in with regards to the disappearing middle class. They were the glue that kept this country together but with them gone the country is going to rapidly divide, then clash in a very violent way and no one will win. I see a police state on the horizon where soldiers are on every corner with M-16s gunning down the disenfranchised without consequence in order to protect the property of the wealthy. Poor young men volunteering to become suicide bombers against the wealthy and their property etc etc.... It's only going to get uglier and uglier if something doesn't change and fast. That Occupy thing isn't even the tip of the iceberg.
No rich person got their by themselves. Their workers helped get them there.
People aren't mad at the rich, they are mad at the greedy.
StephAce
Exactly!
Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.
Abraham Lincoln
The last really good republican president.
Roof, you're obviously just a jackass. Don't paint me with that brush. I have never screwed anyone over to get what I have and never intend to.
Then what you have nukeman is Occupy worthy my friend. Enjoy your minimalist life. Oh and when your gun is jammed down my throat and before you pull the trigger make sure you tell me about how my greed, and overtly flamboyant lifestyle sealed my fate.
Somebody above suggested comparing...
An odd suggestion, considering there is a stronger correlation for the top 10 states that don't spread the wealth and receive more funding than they contribute. In fact, historically, the spread the wealth states have given more than they have received. That doesn't mean however, that distribution always correlates with lower dependence on the Fed. Rhode Island, Hawaii, Pennsylvania, and Alaska have historically spent more than they've taken in. Still, states like Florida, South Carolina, Arizona, Alabama, Oklahoma, Idaho, Tennessee, and Arkansas, which all spend more than they take in, show that if there has been any relationship, its been the reverse of what the quoted narrative would imply.
To an extent, yes, it can serve as an incentive to work. At some point the money and power gap becomes so de-leveraging for the ninety some odd percent that the promise (that work will pay off and lead to a better life) is no longer there. On top of that, when the majority of consumers don't have money to spend, our economy crumbles.
Unfortunately, the right is still playing the blame game with each (R) candidate (as well as congressmen and political pundits) constantly bashing Obama, what they have deemed to be "crony socialism", unions, Democrats, Over-regulation, Fannie and Freddie, economists, science, teachers, or anyone else who doesn't agree that money magically trickles down to the poor or that global warming is some conspiracy made up by the scientific community to continue to get funding from the government, or that the stimulus failed to stop our economy from falling off a cliff, etc who all must be biased.
More bogus information - you have to look at cost of living in these states too - Most of the states in the top 10 have the highest costs of living in the country - but I live in one of the states doing the least to help out, yet my state has one of the lowest costs of living in the country. This means my state is doing a MUCH better job of letting private enterprise support the population and leaving government to do was is essential. I applaud the states that are doing this. I guess if you want handouts you move to one of the top 10, but if you want to work hard and make your own life and have pride in a job well done, move into the bottom 10.....
Or you just live in the one of the dumbest states. All the states listed with the leat generious also rank in the very high category of corruption.
Went back and looked, but didn't see Illinois there either time. Nav, you watch the news today? What that make, three in a row?
And the bottom list ranks at the highest in every negative category, education quality, child mortality, obesity, life expectancy, you name it if it's bad they lead the list.
The cost of living in Rural New York is not significantly higher than elsewhere, except for the staggering cost of taxes and government programs.
Is it a coincidence, or not - the states with the highest welfare rates (and worst economies) are also the ones listed on your soda cans as requiring deposits.
The more government interferes in people's lives, the worst people's lives are.
Generous vs high inequality; I wonder if having high income people makes the govt want to take more or if having generous services makes it easier to stay poor.
Look at the population in New York City alone, its more than the population of Arkansas, That is the point. The income inequality in New York is solely due to the fact that you can't make the amount of money they want without cheap labor you just can't who would be a doorman or the taxi driver the entire economy of that city would be shut down because people would start losing money for services they render cheap. Same goes for cities like LA and silicon valley. The problem is that these money magnet areas completly distort the medians for everyone else, they also distort the tax code for everyone else, the kicker is how do you make it more fair?
@nav: Yeah, I guess we who work are pretty stupid because we pay our own way instead of being "smart" enough to play the welfare game like you are obviously doing. Seems to me like those states listed as not spreading the wealth are those that have people who are too proud to live on the govt. dole.
All you right wing nut-jobs should just quit your jobs, sell your houses, give all of it away and then go live the high life on welfare for a while. Go ahead, live it up. Try walking in their shoes for awhile. You all have glib answers and pulled from the behind stats that make it seem like it a wonderful state to spend your life, raise your children,and watch your grandchildren grow up in.
GET A JOB is the common reply I see on this board by the trolls and liberal bashers. DO THE MATH! There are more people looking for work than there is work. GET A JOB doesn't work! Go back to school and get skills. BS! If you don't have money to eat then you can't afford to go to school. (Try collecting welfare or unemployment while going to school.)
THEY SHOULD PAY FOR THE POOR CHOICES they made in their lives! Sometime things are beyond the control of people. YOU DON'T KNOW!
Don't sit there and make accusations if you are employed, living off a pension that you earned when things were good in this country (Post WWII) or especially if you've never been down and out,really down and out just not unemployed for a couple of months. If you haven't lived on the streets, froze in an unheated apartment, sold your blood plasma to be able to feed your children you don't know.
IF YOU HAVEN'T BEEN THERE than don't feel free to spout your tea party/GOP/moral majority/Rush Limbaugh/Fox News watching BS!
Heh heh, what they don't mention are those that live in states that have sales taxes. Living my whole life in Washington State, it's the poor that pay the highest percentage of taxes through sales taxes. Other wise, it's the poor supporting the poor in Washington State or any state with a sales tax. No wealth being spread around here heh heh. Figure I should put my two cents worth in LOL
Canoworms
Yeah because they are paying stuff with government funds...
Lets see now, Rent and child care doesn't generate sales tax.
Shopping generates sales tax. So how is it that they are so poor but can afford to use my tax dollars to buy stuff that generates sales tax. I'm tired of hearing these stupid comments Canoworms. If I was that poor, I wouldn't be able to afford that kind of shopping.
There's something in the woodpile somewhere...
So you're saying if you were poor you wouldn't buy clothes? Then what do you wear to your job interview? If you were poor you wouldn't buy food? Child care doesn't generate sales tax really then what happens to the money they give to the child care place? They don't buy things for the center with it? They don't pay there staff with that money, the staff doesn't spend their checks on goods? No sales tax off rent? sure as hell pay property taxes water that has tax, heck heating and air TAX! I hope someone like you that obviously has a problem with poor people takes the high road and doesn't take their tax refund,especially seeing how you would be "paying stuff with government funds"
In NJ and I imagine many other states that have a sales tax most all food and clothing items are exempt from sales tax, The people spending more pay more, A person buying a car for $2000 pays 7% sales tax so they are paying $140.00, A person buying a $50,000 high end luxury car pays 7% so they are paying $3500.00 plus they pay a luxury tax. So in reality the high income earners are paying more in sales tax simply because they are spending more, Also in NJ there are urban enterprize zones for blighted area where the sales tax is only 3 1/2% which provides additional tax relief for low income earners, These urban enterprize zones are set up so that certain products like cars are still charged the 7% tax so that the system can not be manipulated. People who live in expensive homes pay more property taxes, You whole theory that the poor are paying the majority of taxes in this country is bogus.
It's on page 325,775 of the new health care bill. You know, the one we won't know what's in it until we pass it.
My vet says the same thing when I bring my dog in for a check-up.
Higher Medicaid spending per beneficiary is an indication of fraud not generosity.
Another propaganda piece from MSDNC. What they don't tell you is that the Democrats are far too incompetent to rectify any of these issues. All they are good for is pointing them out to get elected. Once in office the numbers continue to decline.
It wasn't written by MSNBC, moron. It's from a site called 24/7 Wall St. You're so blindly biased against Democrats, you can't even see what's in front of your face.
Now go run along to Fox News so you can bathe your red brain in conservative crap.
DP is right. This is the ObamaNewsNetwork. How come Corzine isn't headline news today?
"Spreading the wealth" is SOCIALISM. Wealth is NOT DISTRIBUTED, it is EARNED. You know ... by me trading something I have for something you have? Like my labor for some dollars? Like me giving you dollars to rebuild a section of my house, wash my car, provide me with power, etc.
Anything else requires taking something from someone (at the point of a gun) and giving it to someone else. I.E. a one-way "trade".
Sure folks, let's continue this socialistic trend. Eventually no one will produce because there won't be any point - it will all get taken by the government anyway. Then what wealth will be "distributed". Then we'll have nothing but equality of misery.
Keep it up, MSNBC.
Wealth not earned, I assume you mean lobbying for tax loopholes to beat the system? Money you didn't earn, just walked into someones house and left through the back door. Or maybe distributed through mortgage fraud or securities fraud because you paid a lobbyist to get you less industry regulation.
you see it works both ways. If the poor dont get hand outs then the rich shouldn't either. The problem is some want to provide hand outs to certain groups of people and not to others. that is where this needs to stop.
Sure, stop medicare eventually and social security and welfare but also stop this blatant lack of responsible watch dog regulation, lobbying, tax loopholes and mortgage and security fraud only to prosecute noone. That is wealth not distributed too.
be happy.
and except for Alaska...every state that "spreads the wealth" costs a FORTUNE to live in thanks to the tax rate, housing costs, just about everything. DUH....
Cost of living is very high in Alaska - tied for 3rd with New Jersey. Only California and Hawaii are higher.
If the government did not give the wealthy all the breaks [moving jobs off shore, tax shelters etc.] the poor would not be poor as the wealthy would pay higher wages.
if you paid the poor more for doing the same low skill work, costs for everybody would just go up and the poor would have just as low purchasing power as they do now.
Its not the governments job to spread the wealth. The government needs to stop micromanaging every aspect of our lives.
Common,
I completely agree. However the government (that micro-manages our lives) is the government that WE put in place, unfortunately. Thomas Jefferson saw it coming which is why they wrote the Constitution the way they did. The forefathers recognized the fact that giving the keys to the treasury to the public would unravel the whole system eventually. We keep demanding more from the government so, in order to "provide", the government has to take it from the producers and give it to the non-producers.
No, it's not the government's job to spread the wealth but we have hired it to do exactly that. Bummer.
-Max
We had a home in New York and sold it and left, becuase the taxes were insane. Even a small middle-class home can have a tax bill of $7000 or more. And meanwhile, teachers are pullling in $100,000 a year - even when retired.
This would all be well and fine if the test scores were high and the teen pregnancy low. But guess what? People actually move to NY State to go on welfare, it is so lucrative. So the crime rate goes up and the school test scores go down.
People who can afford to, leave, as do businesses. A death spiral results, as fewer income earners stay and more people on the dole move in. A friend of mine in Oswego County told me that the ratio of earners to those on assistance was about 1:1 and his property taxes were DOUBLE mine. Ouch.
The welfare state is NOT the answer. Put people to work, sure. But just handing out money? No.
Do you mean that there is not a direct correlation between amount of money spent per student and the quality/effectiveness of public education? Remarkable!
It is extremely unlikely that any university teaches this fact of life in the education classes (or even the economics or political-science classes.)
Spread the wealth....the Bolsheviks tried that....just watch the original Doctor Zhivago and tell me how that ended. Everyone stripped of everything...all comrades alike. 99.98% all become drones working for The State, piss-poor...while the .02% ruling elite live the high life. So tell me what good came of it? They got rid of the Czar and the upper-crust...and replaced it with hammer and sickle. No winners, only losers.
some winners - the 0.02% were pretty fat and happy for awhile. (Makes our 1% look much more egalitarian in comparison.)
I might also add that most retirees have a choice on where to live, and they are choosing States with lower taxes and lower costs of living. As a result, you will see more and more people FLEE these States as our generation retires. The tax situation in the Northeast will get worse, not better.
I am one of those who considered Income taxes, sales taxes and cost of living when I wanted to retire.
I cannot pay for those who expect entitlements. I have worked and paid my taxes for 75 years. I just want to live with my wife and not have to support those who have not nor intend on working to support themselves.
Helping those who are in need is one thing and I do that for some. Having people being paid to have child after child and just looking for the next handout is something else.
Today there are very few in the lower levels that don't want to work.
Most people on unemployment are there because the jobs left.
When the wealthy got their tax breaks they sold their companies to foreign interests - good example Budweiser. Why not? Because their taxes were lowered they were able to pocket more of the money from the sale. Just smart business sense.
Then the layoffs began.
Here in the Northwest, back in the 80's, lumber companies blamed the spotted owl for their demise.
The fact is they didn't want to retool their mills for smaller logs, which were going to come anyway.
I remember going to Coos Bay and seeing ships heaping with logs we wouldn't mill as they were shipped overseas.
As a retiree, I took my first distributions from the tax-deferred savings this year. I paid the 4.4% state gross-income tax on it, but I am seriously thinking of being in another state before the next distribution. I know I must pay fed tax on all of it someday, but I do have a choice on the state income tax.
If all other things were equal, there would be a good incentive to move to a no-income-tax state. Actually, most of those states have lower cost of living - makes the pension and savings stretch even further. With our freedoms in the US, we can move anytime (even establish legal residence for one year while withdrawing tax-deferred savings.)
The same people who do not want to give government hand outs are the same people who dont want regulation. In other words, you want to turn corporations loose to do what they choose, raising the poverty level as a result of their money grab, but you say no when those on the low end who cannot pay for a lobbyist to get any help.
It's all the same, you dont want hand outs to the poor but you do want hand outs to the rich. If you want to shut off one you have to shut it off to both. shut down medicare but also close the tax loopholes and set in place stringent transparent government watch dogs as well as do away with lobbyists to make sure corporations and wall street do not get their hand outs and drop us into the economic stranglehold they have gotten us in to.
Michael, Don't confuse the two diffrent subjects. you are hiding behind the veil of corporate greed and ignoring the theft of monies from the working class to support those who are just looking for "ENTITLEMENTS" no one is entitled to anything that they don't earn !!!! The problem that we face is the money that the Government Federal, State, County and citys are taking from the workers and giving to the non working.!!!
in a state like california, a "living" wage is about double what it is in a state like texas. the high cost of living and less disposable income forces people into needing assistance at a much higher wage.
if you read the details, a lot of those top 10 states spreading the wealth also have some of the highest wealth inequality. go figure.
Of course they do that's the point because there is such a wide gap they have to pay more so people aren't completely destitute. The real question is how do you solve the problem? Higher taxes isn't going to solve it and giving less money isn't going to solve it. Full employment will but they can't have it with High taxes for a long time, They need to have a one time insane tax hike for a year. take that money pay off debts then they can use the savings on the interest payments to help create tax incentives for hiring low skilled workers or have a workers program where they give recipients a job they can get benefits as a transition and after say 9 mths the payments go away.
Start with the tax code and then an ethics enforcement with teeth for congress. The name of the game is efficiency and fairness.
The best ethics enforcement for Congress would be term limits. This would attract a better quality of candidates and require definite removal of the badduns.
With the current crop, those in the Senate and House are apparently all either perverts or thieves (along with the staff.) All are egomaniacs - it's the nature of the process. The country would probably have a more ethical and representative legislature if the Senators and Members were selected randomly from the voting registers, with term limits. Sure there would be a few senile, criminal, radical, or immoral persons - but wadda we got now?
Spreading the wealth is the primary basis for Marxism and Socialism. Its the primary theme that the socialistic dictators of the past used to create envy that divides the classes and ultimately provides more power to government. This is what Obama and his democratic regime is doing. Listen to his speech on 12/06/11 and you will receive his message clearly. Obama hates the U.S. and wants to convert it to a socialistic country.
A socialist country in which the top 50% support everyone. Just look at who all pays (and doesn't pay) Federal Income Tax. That's what infuriates me.
Seriously!! Ruken people at the low end don't pay federal income taxes because, thats how CONGRESS wrote the dang bill, so being mad at people who are playing by the rules is ridiculous. Secondly even if they did pay something it would be meniscule because we have a progressive tax rate. To say 50% sport everyone is beyond false, everyone pays gas tax, property taxes, sales taxes, state income taxes, payroll taxes, medi-care. So tell me how 50% is supporting everyone? its a damn lie that people like yourself keep trying to convince everyone else its true and its a bold face lie. Yeah and big horn keep singing that Obama Socialist tune its humming a little flat because I don't see either of you arguing about fixing the loopholes in the tax codes for the highend, just at the bottom right? Because its all those poor people that crashed the economy RIGHT.
I live in Minnesota, and let me tell you the taxes are atrociously high. And now they want to raise taxes even more thanks to our out-of-touch-with-the-working-man Gov. Mark Dayton.
Always easy to be for a tax you don't have to pay!!!! Rich or Poor.
I would not mind paying more taxes....as long as it went toward the insane national debt. At the current level...everyone in the country owes $60,000. Most people don't worry about that because they believe someone else is going to pay that for them.
It is the ultimate problem with socialism....you eventually run out of other peoples money too. m. Thatcher
money coming in or going out will not have an affect on our debt crisis until you fix the problem, which is congress and government itself. putting more gas in a gas guzzler or shaving a few pounds of weight off that gas guzzler doesn't change the fact that it is still a gas guzzler.
the federal government does not know how to manage money. it is an incredibly ineffective, inefficient machine that is run by political and corporate greed.
liberals and conservatives talk about government and the rich and corporations as if they are different. they are all in bed with each other.
Missing in this is Sales Tax.
The higher the sales tax, and depending on what is taxed (food), sales taxes always take the greatest percentage of income from the poorest.
When you are taxed for buying the necessities the poor suffer the most.
Rhode Island has the highest tax burden and Texas the lowest. I guess you get what you pay for.
What, exactly, is the point of this article? It really makes no sense.
And since when is it the responsibility of any branch of our governments to "redistribute" income. Seems that our founding fathers expected that income would be a result of how hard one worked, and those that busted their (you know whats) and worked 80 hour weeks could be expected to become more wealthy.
All we're hearing about here is Socialism -- a concept that we all know has failed every place it has been tried.
When I read articles like this written by supposedly intelligent young people, i really get the idea that the USA is doomed!
That's a false statement if I ever heard one. Certain aspects of socialism exist in just about every society and they do very well. Just ask anyone in the Scandinavian areas whose people are deemed the happiest on earth. A society does not have to be totally socialist but they operate a hell of a lot better when certain aspects of human necessities are not left to profiteering greedy fascists who remove all value from everything. The only way your statement can be true is when you refer to" we all" you mean.. all us fascist capitalists, because socialism doesn't line your pockets so in your eyes it's a failed idea.
the great thing is everyone has the right to choose the state they live in. every state comes with different pluses and minuses, it's all about weighing the options and deciding for yourself. if you are of the mentality that you are stuck where you are, well then deal with it.
i have pulled myself together and moved several times when i wasn't happy with the situation i was in. it has worked out very well for me in the long run. sometimes you just have to bite the bullet and take the short term loss for the long term gain.
you can't spend your life worrying about everything going on around you. focus on yourself, friends, neighbors and family first. make your community better and eventually that will trickle up. focus small, think big. worrying about congress and obama is pointless if you can't even manage to get along with your neighbor.
Remember, when anything is bought regardless of where the money comes from, sales taxes are generated. I agree rent and child care doesn't generate sales taxes but those who receive the rent and child care money do buy and generate sales tax income. I to am sick of all this as I'm retired on SS and nothing else. All those years I've worked many on welfare have had more of a disposable income than I've had. But then, after reading where a couple lived in a million dollar home, taking trips to Europe and getting welfare, I wouldn't say fraud is rampant, would you or anyone else? Without any checks, which our politicians are constantly cutting back on funds, it's only going to get worse. Same with USDA and state food inspections, there is fraud rampant there as well. I know, I've worked in packing facilities. It's not the federal or state inspectors, it's the food processing companies.
No sales Tax in Oregon or Alaska
LOL....I just googled the states with the highest budget deficits. The list mirrors the states which are best at "spreading the wealth".
That's false it doesn't mirror it at all, states are pretty evenly split fox on..
actually, it isn't all that even, either ---- several states, including montana, north dakota, and wyoming, have a surplus, not a deficit.