Chris Christie Hits Back At Rand Paul Remark On Sandy Aid

Chris Christie Hits Back At Rand Paul Remark On Sandy Aid
"I find it interesting that Sen. Paul is accusing us of having a "Gimme, gimme, gimme" attitude toward federal spending when in fact New Jersey is a donor state and we get 61 cents back on every dollar we send to Washington. Interestingly, Kentucky gets $1.51 on every dollar they send to Washington," he said.

Most Red States Take More Money From Washington Than They Put In

No votes yet

It's true that most "red" states are taker states for the balance of federal payments.

This is because "red" states tend to have larger areas, lower populations, and more federal lands within them. For example: The strong "red" states* of Arizona, Utah, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, the Dakotas (2), Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma and Texas are 11 states total, 23% of the union's "lower 48" by number. Their combined area (1173249 total sq-mi) is 38% of the lower 48 (3119885 total sq-mi). (Total area includes waters under their control.) Their combined population (48.7M) is 16% of the lower 48 (308M). That means these strong "red" states have to get by with 1/3rd of the population density, which puts more demands on federal money for maintaining roads. Large open areas are more appealing for federal projects, too.

* Denoted as states who voted resultantly Republican in 2000, 2004, 2008 and 2012.

Good story brainzero, too bad its false and your full of shit. Rand Paul is a bald headed jackoff (probably like yourself), who got to represent a podunk state full of redneck inbred right wingers because they recognized his senile old mans name. Go blow smoke up all the asses over at Toledo Talk run by your queer son Jr.


No offense!

Data is false? Which? Outline which data I gave was false and we can go from there. Otherwise, you're wrong. Provably wrong.

Paul may be a jerkoff, but you're the drippings of a jerkoff.

"In many ways, Washington subsidizes coastal life."

Which is a quote from this article:

As one commenter there asks... why keep re-building and re-building after each and every hurricane? When these residents KNOW they are too close to the water?

How is it other "inland" taxpayers' responsibility to pay for their foolishness? When, say, a California resident who builds too close to the edge of a hill or canyon, loses their home when it topples in a gullywasher - do they get "federal aid"? I don't think so.

People make stupid decisions. People, in many cases, who are very well off. Then we are all supposed to go ... "Aw, you poor widdle thing" ??? Enough is enough, and the linked article points out the obvious.

Hi honey:) Did your mother make you kneel on rice when you where a child?

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.