tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1974893846640978769.post7119551983353580145..comments2023-09-26T07:35:33.224-07:00Comments on daggatt blog: earmarksUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1974893846640978769.post-57080998970400663082008-10-08T12:05:00.000-07:002008-10-08T12:05:00.000-07:00Here's some fun facts: In 2005 (the latest year av...Here's some fun facts: In 2005 (the latest year available) those rugged individualists in Alaska received $1.84 in Fed expenditures for every dollar paid in Fed tax, ranking it #3 among states in the Federal largess sweepstakes behind genuine have-nots New Mexico and Mississippi. However, not to worry: in terms of per capita Fed expenditures received Alaska was #1 (and has been since 1999), compared to ranking 18th in Fed. taxes paid (despite having the 4th highest per capita income in 2007). Add to that the fact that Alaskans pay no state income tax and receive ol revenue checks from the state in excess of $2,000 per year for every person including children, and Alaskans do real well. In fact, they rank lowest in terms of overall local/state/federal tax burden. Their so-called tax independence day is 25 days earlier than the national average. So I can certainly understand why Palin is upset about taxes, but I'm not holding my breath waiting for her to say "No thanks!" to the $1.84 tax dividend her state gets for every dollar it pays in. And which state, by golly, do you suppose receives the least back for the Fed. taxes it pays? Why New York, of course -- the very state that was the object of Palin's recent scorn, fer shure. This disdain on her part is, I think, fairly typical of any grifter towards a mark or square.<BR/>And her taking on the oil companies sure does sound real principled, too, doggone it, as she and her hubby pocket ca. $15K a year in oil company cash pay-outs. You betcha!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com