Small question

[MLabreche]

Something I wasn't aware of thay my friend in KY told. KY pays less Fed taxes & gets back more. They're subsidized by other states for even their basic services. Is that true? Is that's the case, how could it deal with all the new state powers it could have in a Ron/Rand Paul administration?

[Dreamofunity]

I was under the impression it was the opposite, that they pay more than they receive, although given the farm subsidies and such maybe your friend was right.

Google might help.

[lukeman]

I've heard this before—not just about Kentucky but in references to states like California & New York subsidizing the rest of the country. Don't know that I've ever seen the facts behind it all, though, so I couldn't begin to comment.

[Elwar]

Something I wasn't aware of thay my friend in KY told. KY pays less Fed taxes & gets back more. They're subsidized by other states for even their basic services. Is that true? Is that's the case, how could it deal with all the new state powers it could have in a Ron/Rand Paul administration?

Why would the state get new powers?

[TonySutton]

Here is an interesting chart which shows all of the states ranked by how many federal dollars they receive for every dollar paid.

http://www.taxfoundation.org/taxdata/show/266.html

You will notice the states with the most population/businesses pay more and receive less.

[sailingaway]

Something I wasn't aware of thay my friend in KY told. KY pays less Fed taxes & gets back more. They're subsidized by other states for even their basic services. Is that true? Is that's the case, how could it deal with all the new state powers it could have in a Ron/Rand Paul administration?

I understand it is not a donor state, which would go along with that, but it would also have fewer imposed COSTS from the federal govt like all the testing in schools. If you get back 10% more than you give, but your costs of compliance are 20% plus it meddles with your independent state sovereignity besides, you are better off without the feds. And costs include imposed obligations you would not have voted in, in your state, to begin with.

[TruthisTreason]

Something I wasn't aware of thay my friend in KY told. KY pays less Fed taxes & gets back more. They're subsidized by other states for even their basic services. Is that true? Is that's the case, how could it deal with all the new state powers it could have in a Ron/Rand Paul administration?


A capitalistic view....


By keeping more money here in Kentucky in the hands of individuals and business owners and not sent to Washington for government directed projects... that will allow us to grow our economy to create wealth and jobs.


Just because we get a little more back than we pay in doesn't do us any good unless WE can invest it in the things WE decide. When government gets all the money it chokes off the investment capital available for private business.

Government doesn't make good decisions.


Or we can depend on government welfare and deficit financing, like we do now.


We are going to have to cut UNITE. :p

[Bergie Bergeron]

I think it's this guy: http://twitter.com/tellymcg

Just seen him when searching for Rand Paul on Twitter, he doesn't seem to know how Kentucky would fund projects without earmarks. Don't have the time to do it myself so if anyone has free time on their hands :)