BOHICA

1 minute ago, Mainecat said:

He wont support 40 billion

It doesnt matter if he supports it or not.  Hillary is who you guys are voting for.

Hasnt the fed govt kind of legislated WV's economy out of business????

14 minutes ago, 1jkw said:

I'm not going to spend all day researching Idaho, but a cursory look Idaho gets quite a lot for such a small number of people.

I really thought more people lived there and I'm surprised how low on the wage scale it is.

Feds own majority of it.  Lots of rivers, endangered species and such to manage.  Lots of indians to pay.  Hell we even have a fed nuke lab for research...  Why here????  cause the fed govt owns and manages everything

3 minutes ago, SnowRider said:

 

2,3,6,7,8,9 are all solid Red states.  Tell the class why they are the takers vs the makers....  otherwise -STFU. 

Alot of blue from 8....  Almost split.

alot of indians in 8 and huge acerage of federal land as well and a huge border to manage

5 minutes ago, 1jkw said:

NYC alone has twice as many blacks, as the entire population of Idaho.

And you have 50 times more white people paying taxes.  To cover the black people cause legislation says you have too.  

We dont have rnough whites to cover the legislative responsibilities of managing the lands and pay reperations to the indians.  Trust me i would rather do away with fed lands and paying indians. Much like the white southern tax payer, they would prolly do away with paying welfare for blacks and welfare whites.

1 minute ago, 1jkw said:

I have no outrage at all, I think it's comical as hell actually, that the very states who rail against the government are most dependent on the government.

That is not by choice...  Its by legislation.  The tax payer that makes 100k a year in a blue state pays the same fed taxes as the tax payer in the redstate that makes 100k a year.  Neither see the benefit of what goes where.  I see where it goes in my state.  Indians, the big 3 auto manfactures....  Forest service and blm dont drive old vehicles or have old atv's or snowmobiles or boats.  Plus all the college kids here in the summerfighting fire.  They have some sweet fire rigs with govt plates.  They get some nice shit to use to manage fed lands.  

13 minutes ago, SnowRider said:

 

You two dumb R's miss the point.  Red states complain about taxes and elect R reps who are 'gonna cut taxes, cut gooberment, and are all about 'states rights' while being the biggest titty suckers of federal dollars.  Red states are the takers and blue states are the makers  Your rhetoric and the rhetoric of the party and officials you two support is not supported by the facts.  Simple.  Except when you're either dumb or do not want to accept the truth....take your pick   

Redstate taxpayers want to cut.  Not keep getting food stamp money flowing in the mass amounts it does.  That is the difference.  

Blue states are against giving fed land back to states and allowing the states to manage.....  So guess what the makers are going to pay for it.

red states taxpayers are all for removing people from welfare but blue states are against taking people off welfare.....  So guess what makers have to pay.

snowblower are you for feds giving up land to states so the fedsand blue states dont have to pay to manage all this land?  Are you for cutting welfare programs to redstate minorities and majorities?  If you answer no on any you are part of the issue why redstates get more federal funding.

If obama is for this, hillary is as well. 

New mexico...  Border state, white sand military installation....  Huge amounts of federal land and huge amounts of reservations.  Big federal dollars. Spent there cause of all of the above.

http://www.cheatsheet.com/business/10-states-most-dependent-on-the-federal-government.html/?a=viewall

Just now, SnowRider said:

 Just tattoo 'I'm a fucking hick' on your forehead  

You dont have the intellect or the comprehension ability to understand.  You dont think the MS black population takes in massive federal dollars to keep it viable???

you are more dumb then i thought

15 minutes ago, 1jkw said:

So Idaho has a large Indian population and federally run land, What about the other red states that don't have them?

Lets take mississippi for example...  Next to the district columbia it prolly is the worst on taxes paid vs benefit.  1.5 million acres of fed land....  More than the north east combined almost.  Also it's population next to the district of columbia has the largest percent of black people by a large amount.....  Like 40 percent of the state population.  Blacks arent notorious for be successful outside of athletics...  

Like i said blue states dont want states to have federal land in the states hand to control and they like keeping minorities in poverty.  Blue states arent cutting mississippi black people off of welfare... Not happening no matter how much redstates try to cut welfare.

Also we get to pay 20 billion to indians cause we stole their shit and rounded them up.  As soverign nations they dont pay tax or collect tax!  Works fucking great for the tax payer.  Pay indians and get casinos and concert venues that dolly pardon and kenny rodgers can continue their careers at.

indians cost alot and contribute next to nothing in tax dollars.  But those things we cant change so it will always tilt to red states getting more tax dollars.  Unless you cut off funding to federal lands and minorities.  Prolly wont happen though.

41 minutes ago, 1jkw said:

 What state are you from?

There are many sources of income that pay for national parks and the parks themselves bring in huge sums of tourist dollars to the state and local governments.

Eliminate  the some red states you talk about and they still will get a larger % of tax subsidy.

Compare the number of people that live in NY or Pa and what we get in tax subsidy and then compare the number of people who just live in NYC, Philly, that are black. The libs the cons nobody is making anybody live anywhere. 

 

 

Idaho...  60% of the land in this state is ownd by the feds.  Very little of it is a national park...  Most of it is just land that see no tourism benefit.  We have indians as well that get huge federal money....  Why cause the white many took the lands that was their's.  Then we have salmon that are endangered species that they have million upon millions of dollars sunk i so that natives can have subsistence life style. I think we are middle of the road on uptake in fed dollars.  We have some rather amazing forest service stuff....  New diesel rams with gov plates, northwest jet boats, behind them or a polaris show room floor being towed by them.  Why??? To manage fed lands that really dont need managed.  

There is about 32 million acres of federal land to manage in my state.  60 percent of the state is owned by the fed govt.....  By comparison NY, and PA combine doesnt even break a million acres to manage  you can throw in conneticuts 8,000 acres of federal land to NY and PA and its still not close to a million acres to manage.  Every morning there are trains of ram and chevy and ford pickups with toys behind them heading out to manage that federal land in my state.  Fed land cost more to manage then it takes in by far!

43 minutes ago, 1jkw said:

If you think they are paying too much get your red states to quit taking far more  back in federal subsidies then.

You keep confusing things, the red states piss and moan about taxes while living off the taxes of the wealthy in the blue states.

Im all for cutting blacks, indians and whites off welfare.  Im also all for states managing the lands inside their borders so the fed govt doesnt have too.  Libs wont let that happen though so we are stuck with what we got....  Libs keeping blacks and indians in red states and keeping all the land.  Their is more fed land to manage in some redstates single handlily then all the blue states combined. Im all for cutting it all so the redstates dont get tax money.

not going to happen though.

26 minutes ago, Mainecat said:

Biggest miss on the site so far

Voting is far the most deadly and costily admendment in the constitution.   Far more deadily then the second.

35 minutes ago, 1jkw said:

Still like it or not the poorest states get the most in benefits like welfare food stamps and the like and they are red states there is no denying that. 

Liberals like to keep and store the majority of the blacks in those poor southern states.  That is what makes those states so poor is all the blacks that dont play sports.

8 minutes ago, f7ben said:

car sounds incredible

Future is now in car racing.  Only inbred faggots will stick with v8's unless they have flat plane cranks.  Flat plane cranks are for hetrosexuals in v8's.  Lt, ls, and hemi engines are for homo's.

Sounds fucking amazing!!! 

51 minutes ago, 1jkw said:

No need to cherry pick anything, look at a map of the red states in 2008, those states got more federal tax dollars then and now period. This is fact not cherry picked data.

The difference is 50 million people getting a dollar back or 10 million people getting 45 dollars back. Surely you see the difference.

What happened to the farm subsidy argument?

Talk about a cherry picked  argument, comparing the number of dollars that 35 states get compared to 5, and not take into account the number of people that is, and dollars per person, is asinine.

Indians and public land is alot of it for many states.  Managing federal lands, such as parks, forest service lands, blm lands is expensive proposition for the govt.  60% of my state's land is government owned.  Takes alot of federal money from tax payers to keep it up....  We also have a large indian population that take huge federal money's cause of agreements the federal govt made with the tribes over the years.  

Easy way to stem the flow of tax payer dollars to many red state is do away with indian money and federal land money requirements.  That would equalize many red states to blue states tax payer up take. 

30 minutes ago, Anler said:

Happens all the time. Cops shoot innocent people all the time. 

CC holders?  Havent heard of a CC holder fucking blazing away and 5 minutes later when the cops show up there is still a gun battle blazing away and cops move in a fill everybody up with lead

cop shoot innocent people...  Typically they are black and running.  Unlikely the innocent shot are CC involved in an active gun battle cause CC holders arent black and running away.

4 minutes ago, Anler said:

Another issue with all of these John Wayne types with cc is if shooting starts and the cops show up they don't know who the bad guys are. Here you have a gun to protect your life and end up getting shot by the cops. 

That happens frequently???

Conceal carry classes just enable people to carry that shouldnt have guns.  All of a sudden they have a class, an ID, and a small gun and they feel the need to carry.

 Im an advocate of carry with out class, an ID or special training.  It would eliminate alot of idiots from carrying as they wouldnt have an ID or advance training classes that  gives them confidence to carry.

Ford gt won lemans....  Looks like ford finished 1,3,4 with a ferrari spoiling a 1,2,3 finish.

either way.  merica!!!!  

You can almost guarantee Gm starts monday on working on getting an ecoboost v6 for the vette!!!

8 minutes ago, f7ben said:

oh stop it buttcocks .....the c7r is chevy's best state of the art multi-million dollar platform. It is being killed by the gt on every track.

C7R debuted in 2014.  Typical gm to release outdated shit the minute it is pretty much released.  State of the art 5.5 v8 isnt that impressive either.