Republican States Are More Dependent On Government

From the article, what does dependency refer to?

 

Define government dependency.

 

so what you are saying is basically nothing to refute the report.
gotcha

 

They do tend to be on the liberal side of anything political but they publish a lot of stories about celebs and other weird news events. I don't value their veracity like I would from a more legitimate news site. And no, I'm not just talking about Fox News.

 

it outlines the parameters they used in the report, they defined it, not me. dont be lazy red stater.

 

To calculate states' dependence, WalletHub analyzed three metrics: how much a state gets in federal funding per every dollar it pays in federal income taxes, the percentage of state funding that comes from the federal government and the number of federal employees per capita, both military and civilian.

and these three things could be misleading. the last one looks to be statistically flawed in my opinion

 

Actually they DONT define it. Thats the main issue.

Metrics like tax income, federal employees and federal contracts for "private" companies is not a dependency.

 

There are at least a few problems with this report. I agree with Pride's reference to use of the word "dependency". The variables they used to calculate their outcome, don't necessarily indicate a "dependence" in the normal use of the word. Secondly, I have to take issue with the use of "average" in terms of identifying anything useful. Averages don't really reveal anything of significance.
Example:

This information is useless, really. It provides absolutely no useless or actionable information. Why do they use it? Because their measurables provide such a conflicting outcome that they are either not taking important factors into consideration, or their measurables didn't tell them what they wanted it to.

How is it that a state like New York for instance, received an overall rank of 20, but they are almost dead last (or in their words, highly dependent) in terms of percent of state revenue received from the feds....43%! To me, THAT is dependent. As well, North Dakota has an overall rank of 35 but they are #1 in terms of state revenue received from the feds with just 19.5% (again, by their terms this would make ND appear the least dependent). Nevada is at 16 but receive 27% of their revenue from the feds. Way too many outliers to support their conclusion IMO.

I also fail to see how the federal employee factor has anything to do with the dependency claim particularly if they are not taking into consideration the Medicare population of each state AND military personnel. It is no surprise that of the top 8 states for military base population, none are in the top half of the "least dependent" and most are in the bottom third.

 

It doesn't matter one bit what color the state was (or still is) in 2012. We know that not everyone in every state even votes. We know that the poor are less likely to vote. It is a bunch of misleading bullshit propaganda. It is like saying "see this election map" and proclaiming that the govt. should be 85% Republican:

Well its not. We know that is a false assumption because when it is broken down by vote, Obama won by 4% with 61% of the Electoral vote.

Look at the poverty levels. Majority of Federal dollars distributed is for Medicaid, CHIP, and SNAP. Federal funding is not a function of equal distribution of funds to the states. It is based on the individual's poverty level. Southern states have historically and still are more impoverished on average and they weigh more on the "needy" end.

This map shows poverty levels by county. The darker the shade, the more impoverished.


You might like chuckling at the hypocrisy of the Red states taking a majority of the money, but what is important to remember is that those Blue states who are well above poverty levels are the ones funding the govt programs to help the poor. After all, that is what Liberals like to do.

 

are those dark spots near the borders mostly mexican?