From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.advocacy

C.H. Ode wrote:

www.newsmax.com (lie site)

You need a search warrant to find it on the mainstream press sites.

So we should be killing rightists? Let's start with the child fuckers.


Ever put a gun in the mouth of a rightwinger? It's not as fun as stuffing their asshole with it.


Watch your back or you'll share Kegbreath's fate.


Rightists are bloodsuckers. Parasites we need to destroy.

The GOP's "Welfare States" Problem: How Red America Drains Blue America

by Richard Gosk | Sep 17, 2025 | Economy
The GOP's "Welfare States" Problem: How Red America Drains Blue America

California's economy is larger than the United Kingdom's. New York sits at
the center of global finance. Massachusetts, Washington, Oregon, and other blue states collectively represent over 60% of America's GDP. In short, the engine that powers the United States economy is overwhelmingly powered by
blue states.

And yet, the states most dependent on federal welfare, subsidies, and tax redistribution are overwhelmingly Republican. These states drain resources from the federal government while exerting disproportionate political influence over how it operates.

Top Three Takeaways from the Article:

Republican-led states are net takers – relying heavily on federal dollars
to run their states that come mostly from blue state taxpayers.

Political representation is skewed – giving resource-draining red states disproportionate power over national policy.

Blue states could push back – through interstate coordination, selective compliance, or even secession threats, forcing a reckoning over who truly sustains America.
Red States as Welfare States

Look at the numbers: states like Mississippi, West Virginia, Alabama, and Kentucky consistently receive far more in federal spending than they contribute in taxes. Mississippi receives about $2.13 in federal money for every $1 it sends to Washington. Meanwhile, states like California and New York send billions more to the federal government than they get back.

This means that the so-called "fiscally conservative" states are, in
reality, welfare states propped up by the wealth generated in blue states. Without blue state subsidies, many red state governments would collapse
under the weight of their poverty rates, infrastructure needs, and
healthcare costs.
Political Power Without Economic Weight

Despite their dependency, red states hold outsized political power. The
Senate grants Wyoming's 580,000 residents the same representation as California's 39 million. The Electoral College system compounds this imbalance, handing disproportionate influence to rural states that
contribute relatively little to national economic output.

In practice, this means red states that drain federal resources wield veto power over national policy. The states most reliant on federal welfare
dollars are the ones most aggressively blocking climate legislation, healthcare reform, and education funding that the rest of the country desperately needs.
What Blue States Could Do

The imbalance raises a provocative question: what if blue states stopped playing along?

Blue states already experiment with interstate compacts, such as climate agreements formed when Trump pulled the U. S. out of the Paris Accord. But
the options go much further:

Selective compliance with federal laws, much like Northern states resisted fugitive slave laws in the 1850s.

Irish Democracy–style passive resistance, where millions quietly stop cooperating with federal overreach.

Economic independence, with state-level initiatives in healthcare,
immigration policy, and even currency.

If pushed far enough, some argue that blue states could even explore the possibility of secession, not as political theater but as a credible negotiating tactic. After all, Quebec nearly left Canada twice, and each
time it forced major concessions.


The Harsh Truth

At the heart of the issue lies an uncomfortable reality: the red state
vision of America – one of social conservatism, weak social safety nets,
and corporate dominance – is subsidized by the very blue states they attack
as "socialist. "

The U. S. has two incompatible futures. One is a multi-ethnic democracy
with robust public institutions. The other is a regressive, exclusionary system kept afloat only by federal redistribution. The former is paying for the latter – and sooner or later, blue states may decide the cost is too
high.


--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2