• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

California Is Now World's 5th Largest Economy, Surpasses UK

truthatallcost said:
Ask yourself why the world's 5th largest economy has the highest real poverty rate of any state in the US, before you take a bow.
Click to expand...

Cost of living. How do states control the market and demand for housing?

Why are the poorest states red states? I won't hold my breath for you to post more than a dumb one line deflection

Floridafan said:
Would you expect the state with by far the highest population to have the highest poverty rate? What does that have to do with the 5th largest economy?
Click to expand...

These people have no argument, just throw out dumb nonsense they hear on Fox news. Ironically right wingers support policies that help poverty rise (we should look at this country having as ridiculous poverty rates as we have for hte richest country in the world), like cutting benefits, refusing to pressure companies to pay more, cutting taxes for the rich, not supporting better education and job training, etc. So as usual, they have no foot to stand on
 
Dittohead not! said:
Why? you just proved yourself wrong. Read that headline once again, carefully this time.... what do you think "it's the other way around" means?
Click to expand...

California pays the Feds a dollar and gets back 96 cents in subsidies. Cut off the subsidies and California's revenue would drop 96%. There's no way an independent California would survive.
 
apdst said:
California pays the Feds a dollar and gets back 96 cents in subsidies. Cut off the subsidies and California's revenue would drop 96%. There's no way an independent California would survive.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but you flunk math.

What do you think "it's the other way around" means? Hurry, you're about to flunk English as well!

OK, OK, I'll give you a hint: If you had a deal where you could send someone 96 cents, and they'd send you back a dollar, would that be a good deal or not?
 
apdst said:
California pays the Feds a dollar and gets back 96 cents in subsidies. Cut off the subsidies and California's revenue would drop 96%. There's no way an independent California would survive.
Click to expand...

"California is among 13 states that ship more tax money to Washington than they get back in federal spending, according to the Rockefeller Institute of Government, a public policy think tank in Albany, N.Y.

They're known as donor states, a title California has held for years, mostly because of the state's relatively younger population and large number of high-income earners."
 
danielpalos said:
"California is among 13 states that ship more tax money to Washington than they get back in federal spending, according to the Rockefeller Institute of Government, a public policy think tank in Albany, N.Y.

They're known as donor states, a title California has held for years, mostly because of the state's relatively younger population and large number of high-income earners."
Click to expand...

4% more. There's no way California could survive a 96% cut in revenue. It would be an American version of Venezuala.
 
Dittohead not! said:
Sorry, but you flunk math.

What do you think "it's the other way around" means? Hurry, you're about to flunk English as well!

OK, OK, I'll give you a hint: If you had a deal where you could send someone 96 cents, and they'd send you back a dollar, would that be a good deal or not?
Click to expand...

Not...lol. i'm not the one flunking economics. Recycling money accomplishes not.
 
apdst said:
Not...lol. i'm not the one flunking economics. Recycling money accomplishes not.
Click to expand...

You're not going to answer, are you? What do you think "it's the other way around" means? It was in the link you gave.

And, I don't suppose you're going to explain how you think California would lose 96% of its income if it wasn't getting it from Washington. I'd really like to see those calculations.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom