Michele Bachmann and Ayn Rand

Jonathan Chait links the conservative Christian movement to Randians:

The religious right has its origins and deepest roots in social issues, as Goldberg shows. But it has evolved into a more full-fledged worldview with coherent positions on economics and foreign policy that often motivate its believers just as strongly. That is a key development that the many analysts who have been dismissing Bachmann have failed to grasp. Twenty years ago, a figure like Bachmann would represent a sizeable but still minority constituency in the party, speaking to a cadre motivated by social issues but unable to represent the concerns of most Republican voters. (For instance, Pat Robertson, the televangelist who turned in a strong showing in the 1988 Iowa caucus but fizzled afterward.)
But Bachmann is a cutting edge religious right conservative, espousing an apocalyptic free market fundamentalism that's become virtually indistinguishable from the apocalyptic Randian worldview of the party's libertarian wing. Bachmann spent months addressing Tea Party rallies where she focused primarily on economics.  Meanwhile, the movement's embrace of right-wing Israeli nationalism has merged with mainstream Republican foreign policy thought. (Not just Bachmann but figures like Mitt Romney* and Newt Gingrich will appear at Glenn Beck's nut-fest in Jerusalem this August.)
The skepticism about Bachmann's prospects reflects an antiquated assumption that there's a natural ceiling within the GOP on the support base of a hard-core religious conservative. Yet both the movement and the party have changed in ways that make that less and less true.
*Update: Romney's campaign now says he will not attend.

I think the strong doctrinaire Biblical fundamentalism of the Christian conservatives has been widened to an American exceptionalism which encompasses some imaginary Capitalistic fundamentalism which overlaps with the economic fundamentalism of Ayn Rand.  I've tried to puzzle through why so many Christian conservatives latch on to the beliefs of Ayn Rand when she is so anti-Christian, but I think that they just welcome fellow travelers who share some core beliefs, much like Jewish Zionists welcome the support of the Christian Zionists who believe that all Jews who do not accept Jesus at the rapture (I think 2/3 of all Jews) will be cast into Hell.

Update:  The underlying story by Michelle Goldberg, which Chait is referencing, is well worth the read, but it may be a little much for those who are squeamish about creepy Christians in politics.

Naked Capitalism Link of the Day

Today's link: America For Sale, by Dylan Ratigan:

As with mortgage securitizations, the conflicts of interest are intense. Pennsylvania nearly privatized its turnpike, with Morgan Stanley on multiple sides of the deal as both an advisor to the state and a potential bidder. As you'll see, these deals are often profitable because they constrain the public's ability to govern, not because they are creating value. For instance, private infrastructure company Transurban, now attempting to privatize a section of the Beltway around DC, is ready to walk away if local governments insist on an environmental review of the project. Many of them have clauses enshrining their monopolistic positions, preventing states and localities from changing zoning, parking, or transportation options.
While the trend is worldwide, privatization of public infrastructure only came to America en masse in the 2000s. It is worth discussing, because where it has happened it has sparked deep and intense anger. In Chicago, protests flared as Mayor Richard Daley pushed the privatization deal through. In Wisconsin, recent protests and counter-protests around controversial Governor Scott Walker revolved around, among other issues, the privatization of state medical services. In Ohio, a controversy is swirling around the political proposal to put the turnpike up for sale, while in Indiana, the state toll road has been in private hands since 2006 (upsetting the truckers who are paying much higher tolls).
The political organizing is intense - on the Republican side, conservative groups are aggressively driving it as a strategy for fiscal prudence. The American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), the influential think tank that targets conservative state and local officials, has launched an initiative called "Publicopoly", a play on the board game Monopoly. "Select your game square", says the webpage, and ALEC will help you privatize one of seven sectors: government operations, education, transportation and infrastructure, public safety, environment, health, or telecommunications.
On the Democratic side, the Obama administration has been encouraging Chinese sovereign wealth funds to invest in American infrastructure as a way to bring in foreign capital. It was Chicago Mayor and Democratic icon Richard Daley who privatized Chicago's Midway Airport, Chicago's Skyway road, and Chicago's Parking Meters. Out of office after 22 years, he is now a paid advisor to the law firm that negotiated the parking meter sale.

Privatizing public assets is always a losing deal for the taxpayers.  Ohio is still studying privatizing the Turnpike, and since Republicans believe taxes must always go down until they reach zero, they will continue to privatize assets to pay for those tax cuts:

Ohio might get several billion dollars if it leases the Ohio Turnpike, and the director of the state Department of Transportation says most of the money would go toward projects in the northern part of the state, where the 241-mile toll road is located.

Department of Transportation Director Jerry Wray is defending the idea of leasing the turnpike amid growing opposition from leaders in the region who worry that having a private operator for the roadway could create other problems, The Plain Dealer in Cleveland reported.

"I'm not here to pick on the turnpike," Wray said. "We are looking at what do we need to do to benefit the state, and this is an asset that has value to us that's not being leveraged."

Ohio lawmakers are working on the two-year state budget, and the Senate version would provide for the Legislature to guide the bidding process if the turnpike were sold or leased.

Republican Gov. John Kasich wants to lease the roadway but ensure the deal benefits Ohio, Wray said. He said Kasich would prefer a 30-year lease that includes a payment up front and a share of toll revenue each year, and the governor is hoping to get at least $2.4 billion from any lease deal.

I love that Jerry Wray uses the word leveraged.  That is such a private equity style word that translates to me as make a bunch of money by gambling.  Leveraged really means used as collateral to borrow against, but in the end, privatization means making private entities rich at the expense of taxpayers.  Don't let anybody tell you different.

Chart of the Day

Pawlenty's tax cuts vs. Bush's tax cuts, from Ezra Klein:

Note that these are pretty much also the Paul Ryan tax cuts.  I'm glad they are looking after the wealthy, nobody else does.  Everybody else picks on the poor guys (meaning the rich).

More on Pawlenty's "Plan"

ataxingmatter takes a look at Pawlenty's proposed tax plan (h/t Mark Thoma):

Former Minnesota Republican Governor Tim Pawlenty is running for president.  Like the rest of the GOP cast of hopefuls, he is bound and determined to introduce radical changes to the federal tax system that will carry out a corporatist agenda and so has released a proposed tax plan.   There is lots wrong with his plan, from the likelihood of it costing 7.8 trillion to 10 trillion over a decade, to the fact that it reduces revenues to the federal government so much that it raises only about 13.6% of GDP, a starvation level (especially when you consider the military commitments that the right is so supportive of) that would jeopardize all important public services and public goods like public transportation, public health care, public retirement security, and public parks.  Then there's the wacky extremist right-wing corporatist tax policy that it incorporates--a policy designed to continue the raping of the American economy and the American middle class by the elite current owners and managers of America's concentrated capital.
It includes:

• a radically less progressive schedule of rates--10% and 25%
• zero taxation for almost all income from capital--capital gains, dividends, and interest
• elimination of the federal estate tax
• reduction of the corporate tax rate from a statutory rate of 35% to a statutory rate of 15%
• elimination of "special interest handouts, carve-outs, susidies and loopholes." 

There's nothing commendable about this so-called plan.  It is nothing more than a shifting of the tax burden to the middle class (and below) that furthers the corporatist agenda of allowing multinational corporations and their owners and managers a free reign, using all the benefits of the market established by government but sharing almost none of the burdens.

This is pretty much Paul Ryan's Roadmap for America's Future.  It is a blatant attempt to make the richest Americans nearly exempt from taxation.  It is absurd, and anyone who proposes such a scheme shouldn't get a damn vote from anybody.  Tim Pawlenty has proven the farcical nature of his bid for President.

Chart of the Day

Today's chart, from the Economist, h/t the Sister:

Where, oh where could we find places to cut wasteful spending?  I know, in programs which help the needy.  At least that's where John Boehner and his associates look to cut.  I think we could probably save a significant amount by cutting Defense spending by 30% or so.

Naked Capitalism Link of the Day

Today's link: Georgia farmers attest to labor shortages ahead of new immigration law enforcement, at the American Independent:

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reports on the ongoing exodus of undocumented immigrants from Georgia in anticipation of the new immigration enforcement law, which will take effect on July 1:

Businesses that cater to the region’s Hispanic residents say the new law has sown fear among immigrants, scaring away their customers and employees. A grocery store chain that serves Hispanic immigrants says the new law has led to sharp cuts in sales at some of its locations, forcing it to consider closing one of its spots. And the pastors of local Hispanic churches say some of their parishioners are leaving Georgia and taking the donations that support charitable causes with them.

Presumably, this phenomenon was the new law’s intended effect, but there are signs that some Georgians weren’t anticipating the central role that Hispanic immigrants play in the economy. The Georgia Agribusiness Council released a survey of Georgia farmers which said that 46 percent reported facing a labor shortage. As the Journal-Constitution’s Jim Galloway points out, comments on the survey repeatedly mentioned the law as the cause of the shrinking agricultural population. One of the comments summarized what is happening:

The labor pool has dried up because Hispanic are leaving Georgia as fast as they can. [sic] They are terrified about what will happen when this law goes into effect. Since we cannot find immigrant labor, we are trying to hire non-immigrant labor. Even with pay rates above $10 an hour, we cannot find people interested in working outdoors, in the heat. They will stay for one or two days and then leave. Our work is labor intensive, so we are losing money every day by not having dependable, hard-working laborers. This is just another blow to our business on top of what we have already lost due to the economy.

The politicians who initially pushed for the law are now reacting to complaints from farmers, and Gov. Nathan Deal has requested an expedited review of the law’s effects from the state’s agriculture commissioner.

Idiots.  Hispanic immigrants, legal or illegal, always end up contributing beneficially to local economies.  There are pressures on the system, especially in health care, as the illegal immigrants can't get insurance through their employers and don't want to go to the hospital until the situation is dire, because they are afraid of deportation.  These anti-immigration politicians are, in my opinion, just bigoted, and these Arizona-style laws are just tea parties in each state trying to prove their bonafides.  Let them cut their own economic throats.  Ohio shouldn't follow suit.  We don't have enough illegal immigrants, because our economy was too crappy to attract them last decade.

More West Bank News

Settlers accused of trying to torch mosque:

West Bank settlers are suspected of attempting to set fire on Tuesday morning to a mosque in the West Bank village of Maghayer, breaking through a window and rolling burning tires into the mosque in order to maximize damage. The attackers left a message in Hebrew scrawled on the mosque’s walls, reading “price tag” and “Alei Ayin,” suggesting that the acts came in response to last week’s evacuation by Israel of the illegal outpost of Alei Ayin. Maghayer  is a small village near Ramallah, which has been subject to continuous harassment from settlers from the nearby settlement of Yidi’at.
Darwish Elhaj Mohammad, the imam of the mosque, told 972 that the settlers burned between 25 and 30 Qurans. Using two burning tires, they also succeeded in destroying the carpets and the wall. According Imam Darwish, this incident is one in a series of attacks aimed at seizing the village’s agricultural land.
The acts were quickly condemned across the Palestinian religious and political spectrum. Within hours, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas ordered the immediate restoration of the mosque. The village residents intend to have the mosque repaired and ready for Friday prayers .

The settlers are a danger to Israel, and it is irresponsible for Republicans to rally unstintingly to their side.  That of course will not stop them from doing so. 

Romney's Running for President

From Portfolio.com:

"From my first day in office my No. 1 job will be to see that America once again is No. 1 in job creation," he said as he officially announced his candidacy in New Hampshire, home of the 2012 campaign’s first presidential primary.

Does anyone know when the last year that the U.S. led the world in job creation?  I would guess late 90's at the most recent, if even then.  I would like to know how Romney will create more jobs in the U.S. than will be created in China.  Maybe by lowering U.S. wages to Chinese rates?

Update:  Better late than never, I changed the text color of the quote to make it more readable.  Sorry, I've been busy trying to get the crops in.

Naked Capitalism Link of the Day

Today's link: The Dismal Political Economist Interviews John Maynard Keynes, at The Dismal Political Economist:

Mr. Keynes:  You use fiscal policy to increase Aggregate Demand.  Increasing government spending is the best way to do this, since you can target specific areas, specific industries and specific pockets of unemployment.  Once you get the economy jump started, investment and growth will start to take the economy to full employment.  Just make sure you do it long enough and strong enough.

17. Well Conservatives in the U. S. Congress want to cut government spending and decrease taxes on the very wealthy.  Will that work.

Mr. Keynes:  Well, not on this planet, maybe in some other solar system.  How exactly does firing government employees and firing employees in the private sector who provide service and goods to government return an economy to full employment?  And you need tax cuts directed at people who need the money and who will spend it on consumer goods to stimulate, you know, that  Aggregate Demand thing again.

Why would you let people like that into government?

17. Well, they were voted in because voters disliked Democratic plans to provide universal health care for everyone at an affordable price.

Mr. Keynes:

Why would you let people like that vote?

The whole thing is worth reading.

More on Republican Problems With Arithmetic

PGL at EconoSpeak (h/t Mark Thoma):

Glenn (Hubbard) argued that we enjoyed a reduction in the debt ratio from 1945 to 1960, which is true. In fact, the debt ratio continued to decline during the 1960’s and 1970’s despite the Vietnam War spending and the various recessions we had during the Nixon, Ford, and Carter Administrations.

The CBPP chart shows that the explosion in the public debt ratio discussed by Glenn Hubbard comes from three primary sources: (1) the Bush tax cuts (I don’t exactly recall Glenn objecting to these when he worked for the Bush Administration); the two wars started at a similar time; and (3) the recession and fiscal policy moves designed to limit the recession. Robert Barro back in 1979 noted that the US economy often saw jumps in the debt to GDP ratio as the result of major wars and recessions but for its history up to then, long-term fiscal policy tended to retire this debt over time. Ah but this was another example of the Cheshire Cat in economics – as soon as an economist documents this tendency for long-term fiscal responsibility, we get the Reagan tax cuts which were not accompanied by meaningful spending cuts. So the debt ratio rose dramatically until the fiscal discipline movements of the 1990’s – which were in part defense spending cuts and largely tax increases – began to show up in a debt ratio that began to decline. At least until we had the fiscal irresponsibility of the Administration that Glenn Hubbard served.

We should, however, mention the elephant in the room which is the projected increase in Federal spending on health care. The Administration that Glenn Hubbard served made the problem worse as it added a prescription drug benefit without adding any revenues to pay for it. The current Administration managed to pass health care reforms that would tend to limit this growth in spending but with no support from the Republican Party. And yet it is this same Republican Party that not only refuses to consider any revenue increasing measures but wants to cut taxes even more.

Republicans are irresponsible and not worthy of a vote.  The Bush tax cuts need to go away.  The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan need to be ended. 

Israel and U.S. Evangelicals

Andrew Sullivan describes the ties:

Nicely put. But I would not discount the religious themes underpinning this, which are very potent in the current GOP. Evangelicals view Israel and America as uniquely sacred entities, united in an eschatological struggle between good and evil. Each country is thereby exempted from the usual international laws and rules, because G-d himself has anointed both of them in a pre-ordained battle of existential power.
When Romney preposterously declares that Obama has thrown Israel under the bus, he is sending a message to evangelicals. Allegedly betraying Israel at this pre-apocalyptic hour is the work of Satan. Any partition of the chosen land is the goal of the anti-Christ - hence the incomprehension and shock at any mention of the 1967 borders. Just as the early Puritans saw their new land as a new Zion, so did the first Zionists in Israel. And you cannot rationally negotiate with these kinds of convictions. Alas, in Israel, the pre-existing population didn't die en masse by unwitting biological warfare. Hence the need, as Palin and Huckabee have urged, for a much more aggressive Jewish settlement of Judea and Samaria.

I sometimes feel like a conspiracy theorist as I chalk up right-wing support for Israel to crazy religious beliefs, but I think it is real.  I don't understand it at all, but it scares the bejesus out of me that people are actually wanting the end-of-days to arrive.  I just hope that Republicans and Jewish settlers drag each other down without hurting the rest of us.

Republicans Can't Do Arithmetic

The GOP proposed a job creation plan yesterday (h/t Mark Thoma):

House Republicans, meanwhile, offered a proposal that would lower the top tax rate on individual and corporate income to 25 percent from 35 percent. The plan would also strengthen patent protections against some lawsuits, require congressional approval of significant new regulations, increase domestic oil protection and promote the party’s effort to make large cuts in government spending.

I hate to point out to those morons that cutting taxes has not and will not increase revenues, so in order to reduce the deficit, they would need to drastically slash spending, thus causing large numbers of jobs to disappear.  The tax cut for the wealthiest Americans will not increase private spending enough to offset those job losses.  We've been through this before, it doesn't work.  If it did, we'd be at full employment.  A vote for Republicans is a vote for morons.  Tax rates should be going up from 35%, not down.

Update: Uwe Reinhardt makes the case for higher taxes.

Huntsman Tries To Be A Likable Conservative

Joshua Green:

 Jon Huntmsan arrived in New Hampshire last week touted by much of the national press corps as the Republicans' miracle moderate: The former Utah governor and ambassador to China for President Obama acknowledges global warming, supports civil unions for gays, and has criticized Republicans' obstinacy and extremism -- shocking stuff in a party that's been galloping to the right. Now, he'd like that same party to nominate him to challenge Obama.

This storyline proved irresistible to the media, if not to the residents of New Hampshire. During his five-day swing through the state, Huntsman's events were mobbed by reporters, who often outnumbered actual citizens. Part of the interest stemmed from the anticipated clash with conservatives upset at having a moderate in their midst.

That confrontation never came, and one reason why it didn't is that Huntsman showed himself as much more conservative than advertised. Without disavowing his earlier positions, he staked out territory well to the right of some other candidates, which suggests that he's less concerned with pushing new ideas than in presenting the old ones in a more palatable way.

I don't know that this will work well.  It's nice that a Republican candidate recognizes reality on global warming and civil unions, but wrapping up conservative boilerplate in niceness isn't going to fly again, I don't think.  Compassionate Conservatism was tried by somebody, and just ended up being taxes for the wealthy, wars, incompetent governance and a collapsed economy.  I don't think we can get buy the same crap again.  Unfortunately, it is going to take a complete electoral obliteration for the GOP to realize that taxes must go up on the wealthy, and we will need more government, not less in health care, among the more pressing issues.  As for the social issues, Republicans will continue to lose young voters as long as they insist on maintaining their hostility to gay marriage and immigrants.  It appears that they just don't care, and will tie themselves to the aging boomers and let the chips fall as they may.  I think I'll just steer clear of the crazy train.

RIP Mark Haines

I think we need more people saying stuff like this:

Unfortunately, too many people make the argument which isn't supported by facts, and they get away with it. (h/t Ritholtz)

W. Iowa county GOP Is Crazy

Des Moines Register:

The runaway favorite of the western Iowa crowd at a Republican fundraising dinner Friday was Georgia Republican Herman Cain – the guy everyone was there to see speak.
But even in absentia, Alaska’s Sarah Palin claimed a surprising second place in the Pottawattamie County GOP’s dollar poll, with 38 percent of the votes to Cain’s 55 percent.
“Of the approximately 230 people in attendance, 153 people voted,” said Jeff Jorgenson, the county party chairman. “Of course these results are not scientific, but I am going to say they accurately reflect the mood of the evening.”

Michele Bachmann, John Huntsman, Ron Paul and Mitch Daniels got 5%, 1%, 1% and 1% respectively.  Mitt Romney and Tim Pawlenty didn't receive any votes.  The 2012 election is going to be a train wreck, but maybe we'll get a sane Republican party out of it.

The Head of the GOP

New Yorker Magazine has an interesting profile of Roger Ailes (h/t Ritholtz):

Ailes had hired Beck in October 2008 to reenergize Fox’s audience after Obama’s election, and he’d succeeded beyond anyone’s wildest hopes, tapping deep wells of resentment and igniting them into a vast, national conflagration. The problem was that it had almost engulfed Fox itself. Beck was huge and uncontrollable, and some of Fox’s other big names seemed diminished by comparison and were speaking up about it. Beck seemed to many to be Fox News’s id made visible, saying things,Obama is a racist, Nazi tactics are progressive tactics, dredged from the right-wing subconscious. These were things that weren’t supposed to be said, even at Fox, and they were consuming the brand. Ailes had built his career by artfully tending the emotional undercurrents of both politics and entertainment, using them to power ratings and political careers; now they were out of his control.

It is amazing what this man has been able to accomplish with Fox News.  I don't know what makes people tune in and believe what they hear, but they sure do.

Why Do They Hate America?

Glenn Greenwald points out how Republicans are able to side with Israel against the interests of the United States (h/t John Cole):

UPDATE:  Prime Minister Netanyahu is scheduled to address a joint session of Congress - having been invited by House Republicans -- and David Frum excitedly wonders this:

I think a better question is whether the ovation will be longer and more enthusiastic than those accorded American Presidents. It is ironic indeed that the same GOP members who will stand and cheer wildly for this foreign leader in conflict with their own country's President are typically the first to scream "unpatriotic!" accusations at others.

It really ticks me off that a bunch of chicken hawks and Rapture believers will go out of their way to support a country that has little strategic value for the United States, against the interests of the United States.  It doesn't make sense to me why Israel, whose only real ally is the United States, gets to dictate policy to our country.  Netanyahu is a radical nut, and Republicans defend him as opposed to our President.  Imagine if Democrats backed Jacques Chirac against Bush in the leadup to the Iraq war.  They would have been pushing for treason charges.  I always found it humorous that the former half-term governor from Alaska had two flags in her office, a U.S. flag and an Israeli flag.  Remember, her state has zero ties to Israel, but is contiguous to Canada.  Wouldn't her state actually share some interests with their neighbor as opposed to a tiny strip of desert halfway around the world?  Oh well, nobody ever accused Republicans of being smart.

Kasich Poll Numbers Are Struggling

I'm not one to put much stock in polls, but I think this is interesting:

In Ohio, Governor John Kasich is struggling as well, after narrowly defeating Democrat incumbent Ted Strickland last fall. A new Quinnipiac poll released on Wednesday found Kasich's approval numbers decidedly upside down, with 49 percent of voters disapproving and 38 percent approving of his efforts in office to date. This was a nominal improvement over the previous month, when he had a 46-30 split. But the persistent gender gap facing Kasich is stark—women disapprove of Kasich's job in office by a margin of 51 to 33 percent.

Maybe barely winning an off-year election when the opposing party couldn't turn out its base, then acting as if you won a landslide isn't a good idea.  Maybe putting in place radical policy changes when you barely won an election isn't a good idea.  Maybe being an obnoxious blowhard isn't a good idea.  I guess we will see what happens.  But when a guy puts in a tax cut when there is an $8 billion dollar deficit, then says he might push for more tax cuts the next year, when the massive cuts or local tax increases required haven't even hit yet,  he probably deserves bad poll numbers.

Crumbling Infrastructure-Satellite Edition

From All Things Considered yesterday:

Then, Lubchenco used the occasion to point to the importance of NOAA's satellite program.
Ms. LUBCHENCO: Satellites are a must-have when it comes to being prepared in detecting and tracking dangerous tropical weather. Not having satellites and not applying their latest capabilities could spell disaster.
HAMILTON: And she said there's a very real possibility that could happen.
Ms. LUBCHENCO: The future funding for our satellite program is very much in limbo right now.
HAMILTON: Already, Lubchenco said, the agency has been forced to delay the launch of a critical satellite. It would have traveled in a polar orbit, beaming down information for weather and climate forecasts. As a result, when the current satellite doing that job stops working, there will be no replacement.
Ms. LUBCHENCO: We are likely looking at a period of time a few years down the road where we will not be able to do severe storm warnings and long-term weather forecasts that people have come to expect today.
HAMILTON: And Lubchenco says satellites aren't just for hurricanes.
Ms. LUBCHENCO: For example, our ability to do a five-day heads-up about the severe tornadoes that hit a couple of weeks ago was a direct consequence of our having polar orbiting satellites.
HAMILTON: Lubchenco's comments come after years of warnings by groups, including the National Academy of Sciences, that the U.S. needed to replace many aging satellites used to study and monitor the Earth.

The Republican attempts to slash non-defense, non-entitlement spending, combined with constant tax cuts, leads to valuable basic science funding being slashed.  These programs don't have a strong constituency, but they have large real-life effects, and are extremely cheap based on their usefulness.  This nation will suffer for many years because of the 30 years of malinvestment under generally Republican guidance.

Net Recipient States

Via Ritholz, this:

Happily, the Tax Foundation — a conservative Washington-based think tank — has, however unintentionally, provided the answer. In 2007, the foundation published a survey of 2005 federal spending in each state and compared that with each state’s contribution in federal taxes. In other words, the foundation identified the states that sponge off the federal government and those that subsidize it. The welfare-queen states and the responsible, producing states, as it were.
The list, alas, hasn’t been updated — in part, no doubt, because conservatives didn’t like what it revealed: that those states that got more back from our government than they paid in were overwhelmingly Republican. The 10 biggest net recipients of taxpayers’ largess were, in order, New Mexico, Mississippi, Alaska, Louisiana, West Virginia, North Dakota, Alabama, South Dakota, Kentucky and Virginia. The 10 states that paid in the most and got back the least were New Jersey, Nevada, Connecticut, New Hampshire, Minnesota, Illinois, Delaware, California, New York and Colorado.
Now, that list has surely changed since the middle of the last decade — Virginia has probably gotten richer and paid in more; Nevada has surely gotten poorer and paid in less. But today’s ranking are probably much the same, unless farming and manufacturing suddenly pay more than finance and high-tech. Even allowing for cyclical variations and political transformations, it’s patently clear that the states that drain the government also constitute the Republicans’ electoral base, while those that produce the wealth constitute the Democrats’. Far from strengthening our moral character, the red states plunge us into the slough of dependency.

That is funny overall.  I think it is interesting that a state like Connecticut, home to many hedge fund titans, is a pretty high tax state, but governors in the Midwest claim that people are moving south to get lower taxes.  I think the real driver is the weather, but what do I know, I also thought that I might see the sun for more than 4 days in May.  I just love to see somebody point out the obvious: that the people who are the biggest beneficiaries of government dislike it the most.