Rich State Poor State 2014 7/10/15

State

Dollars (millions)

Ratio to GSP

Revenue

Spending

Net

Revenue

Spending

Net

Alabama

23,789

61,806

-38,016

11.9%

31.0%

-19.1%

Alaska

5,449

7,502

-2,052

9.5%

13.1%

-3.6%

Arizona

40,530

58,723

-18,193

14.3%

20.7%

-6.4%

Arkansas

30,729

20,447

10,282

25.3%

16.8%

8.5%

California

369,193

236,560

132,633

16.0%

10.2%

5.7%

Colorado

52,003

35,559

16,444

17.0%

11.6%

5.4%

Connecticut

57,697

64,994

-7,296

22.8%

25.7%

-2.9%

Delaware

19,040

6,105

12,935

30.3%

9.7%

20.6%

District of Columbia

26,433

26,551

-118

22.9%

23.0%

-0.1%

Florida

154,353

150,037

4,316

18.4%

17.9%

0.5%

Georgia

79,566

55,473

24,093

16.7%

11.6%

5.1%

Hawaii

7,723

10,706

-2,983

10.0%

13.8%

-3.9%

Idaho

9,224

10,924

-1,700

14.4%

17.1%

-2.7%

Illinois

148,332

70,118

78,215

19.9%

9.4%

10.5%

Indiana

54,607

106,579

-51,973

17.2%

33.5%

-16.4%

Iowa

22,309

19,434

2,875

13.1%

11.4%

1.7%

Kansas

25,897

14,729

11,168

17.6%

10.0%

7.6%

Kentucky

30,128

71,522

-41,394

16.0%

37.9%

-21.9%

Louisiana

43,023

29,411

13,612

17.1%

11.7%

5.4%

Maine

6,902

10,525

-3,624

12.4%

18.8%

-6.5%

Maryland

59,614

62,445

-2,831

17.1%

17.9%

-0.8%

Massachusetts

100,161

68,024

32,137

21.8%

14.8%

7.0%

Michigan

71,184

69,061

2,123

15.8%

15.3%

0.5%

Minnesota

96,227

59,213

37,014

30.4%

18.7%

11.7%

Mississippi

11,011

21,879

-10,867

10.5%

20.9%

-10.4%

Missouri

61,512

44,587

16,925

21.6%

15.7%

5.9%

Montana

5,338

7,248

-1,910

12.1%

16.4%

-4.3%

Nebraska

23,885

11,335

12,550

21.3%

10.1%

11.2%

Nevada

16,579

14,629

1,949

12.6%

11.1%

1.5%

New Hampshire

11,044

8,513

2,531

15.4%

11.9%

3.5%

New Jersey

134,870

55,998

78,872

24.6%

10.2%

14.4%

New Mexico

8,758

21,212

-12,454

9.4%

22.8%

-13.4%

New York

250,618

145,994

104,624

17.8%

10.4%

7.4%

North Carolina

72,472

59,945

12,527

15.0%

12.4%

2.6%

North Dakota

7,585

56,969

-49,384

13.8%

103.3%

-89.6%

Ohio

129,901

73,441

56,460

22.3%

12.6%

9.7%

Oklahoma

32,611

25,341

7,270

17.8%

13.8%

4.0%

Oregon

28,409

28,482

-72

13.2%

13.2%

0.0%

Pennsylvania

126,374

182,015

-55,640

19.1%

27.5%

-8.4%

Rhode Island

13,888

8,373

5,514

25.3%

15.2%

10.0%

South Carolina

22,242

73,069

-50,827

11.7%

38.4%

-26.7%

South Dakota

6,734

6,033

700

14.7%

13.2%

1.5%

Tennessee

56,937

72,691

-15,755

18.9%

24.2%

-5.2%

Texas

265,336

147,338

117,998

16.1%

8.9%

7.2%

Utah

18,389

13,459

4,930

13.0%

9.5%

3.5%

Vermont

4,325

4,688

-363

14.6%

15.8%

-1.2%

Virginia

75,049

92,321

-17,272

16.2%

19.9%

-3.7%

Washington

67,813

51,083

16,730

15.9%

12.0%

3.9%

West Virginia

6,885

14,611

-7,726

9.1%

19.4%

-10.3%

Wisconsin

49,592

78,632

-29,040

16.9%

26.8%

-9.9%

Wyoming

4,892

3,560

1,331

11.1%

8.1%

3.0%

Total

3,047,160

2,649,893

397,267

17.6%

15.3%

2.3%

12 Responses

  1. Not a surprise: CA, TX, and NY 1-2-3 as donors.

    Surprise to me: PA a big donee. I think that has not usually been the case. Is the economy suffering there?

    MN pays in enough to cover what WI takes out.

    89% of NDs Gross State Product is federal taxes it gets from the rest of us. Huh?

    What stands out for you?

    Like

  2. Mark, is there a source article for this?

    Thanks!

    Like

  3. I’d be interested in what the spending was comprised of for each state.

    Also on this:

    89% of NDs Gross State Product is federal taxes it gets from the rest of us. Huh?

    I don’t think that is a correct conclusion. Government transfers do not count towards GSP. The correct conclusion is that ND is receiving from the feds a bit more than it produces for itself. (Govt transfers = 103% of GSP) That is why I think that net of the ratios of rev/spending to GSP is kind of meaningless.

    Like

    • I’d be interested in what the spending was comprised of for each state.

      Do you mean “What comprised the federal spending in each state?”

      I think that is available.

      And I am sure you are correct about ND’s 89+%.

      Like

      • Mark:

        Do you mean “What comprised the federal spending in each state?”

        Yeah. Like is it maintenance of a military base, or welfare payments. And, if the former, does that include salaries of soldiers? Does the cost of maintaining an FBI office in Topeka count as spending on Kansas? That sort of thing.

        Like

        • I read the wikipedia entry, and the figures for fed spending include wages and salaries. Those should be excluded, as those do not represent transfers, but rather (at least theoretically) an exchange of value for value. The person provides a service and gets paid in exchange.

          Also, I think it would be more interesting to compute the spending/revenue ratio rather than looking at absolute numbers. CA may be the biggest “donor” in absolute terms, but as a percentage Deleware is a much bigger donor. It collects back from the fed only 32% of what it pays, while CA collects back fully 64%.

          Like

        • Ah…I see that the wikipedia entry does what I suggested further down in the article. It looks like the numbers vary quite a bit from year to year. For example, CA has only a 64% spending/revenue ratio in the latest year, but in 2012 and 2011 it was 97% and 99% respectively. In 2009 the ratio was over 100%, meaning CA was a net receiver, not donor. Same is true for TX in 2012 and 2011 (145% and 149%!).

          I think a closer look at just what the spending is comprised of, and where the tax revenues are coming from, is necessary to make it more meaningful.

          Like

        • See this site:
          http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/

          Like

        • Mark:

          See this site:

          Does that break down spending by both category and state together? That would be interesting. For example, as a retirement state I would imagine that a large portion of government spending in Florida would come from Social Security, which would also tend to limit the revenues it is paying in. Retirees aren’t working and paying income tax. That tells a different story from, say, Alaska where most of the government spending goes towards the military.

          Like

  4. Brent – Good piece on the voter demographics argument that both you and I make regularly:

    “Update: My colleague Derek Thompson picks up the baton from me and digs deeper into the demographics of the so-called 47 percent. One important note he makes is that it’s often the lowest-income people in these red states who are most likely to vote Democratic — it’s just that the rest of the population is conservative enough to carry the states into the Republican column.

    In 2008, Obama lost Georgia by 5 percentage points but he won 70% of voters who earned less than $30,000 — which is precisely the demo most likely to owe no federal income tax. Obama lost Mississippi by 14 percentage points, but picked up 66% of voters who earned less than $30,000. As a general rule, Republicans win among richer voters — both in the red states and the blue.”

    http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/09/where-are-the-47-of-americans-who-pay-no-income-taxes/262499/

    See also:

    http://super-economy.blogspot.com/2012/02/do-welfare-recipients-mostly-vote.html

    http://super-economy.blogspot.com/2011/04/red-state-rising.html

    Like

  5. I love the mentality of the left: If it benefits someone in a red state it by definition is helping out the right…

    Like

Be kind, show respect, and all will be right with the world.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: