Cuomo calls out McConnell on Kentucky's federal freeloading

Kentucky receives 148 billion more fed money than they put in.
New York puts in $116 billion more than they receive.
Yet Mitch McConnell of Kentucky wants no more federal aide for New York.
Andrew Cuomo (April 23, 2020): Let’s talk about fairness, Mitch. NYS puts $116 billion more into the federal pot than we take out. Kentucky TAKES $148 billion more from the federal pot than they put in. But we don't deserve help now because the 15,000 people who died here were predominately democrats?

Does NY City have any major military facilities to compared with Ft Campbell KY?

its one of the 5 largest US military bases and costs billions to maintain

also, much of the money going to KY is for welfare and much of that goes to democrats
 
Fine. Have Congress vote on it tomorrow. End Food Stamps tomorrow. End Section 8.
Why?
NY more than pays for those programs.
Tell you what, let's take out the middle man.: No New Yorker will qualify for federal welfare programs and the state can pay for them itself.
Tell you what, let's take out the middle man.: No New Yorker will qualify for federal welfare programs and the state can pay for them itself.
LOL...
The state more than pays for them with their federal payments. That's the point of the thread, dope.
By all means though, you should make that offer to Kentucky.
 
You used the word, douchebag. It's a epithet for people who receive welfare from the government.
LOL...
Nope. You are the "welfare" queen, dope.
Welfare is not a requirement to be a freeloader.
That's certainly true. You can also be a government employee.

As I explained previously, the difference between what a state pays to the federal government and what it receives is not welfare.
 
Are you opposed to "freeloaders" or not
LOL...
I've stated so from the beginning of the thread, dope. It took you this long to get that point?
No, you really aren't, because you want to continue actual government welfare programs like food stamps. Buying F-16 fighters is not welfare.
I've said no such thing, loser.
No one failed to notice that you declined endorsing the idea of abolishing actual welfare programs like AFDC.
 
Are you opposed to "freeloaders" or not
LOL...
I've stated so from the beginning of the thread, dope. It took you this long to get that point?
No, you really aren't, because you want to continue actual government welfare programs like food stamps. Buying F-16 fighters is not welfare.
I've said no such thing, loser.
So you support abolishing AFDC and Food Stamps?
 
Fine. Have Congress vote on it tomorrow. End Food Stamps tomorrow. End Section 8.
Why?
NY more than pays for those programs.
Tell you what, let's take out the middle man.: No New Yorker will qualify for federal welfare programs and the state can pay for them itself.
Tell you what, let's take out the middle man.: No New Yorker will qualify for federal welfare programs and the state can pay for them itself.
LOL...
The state more than pays for them with their federal payments. That's the point of the thread, dope.
By all means though, you should make that offer to Kentucky.
They are still freeloaders, moron.
 
But you love wealth redistribution, so what's the problem?
Do I?

Yes, you do, so you really have nobody but yourself to blame. You're the one who elects these politicians who want more centralized control in D.C. so they can divvy up slices of the pie based on who lobbies them the most or which Congressman has the most seniority. Then you come here and bellyache about "taker states." As I said initially, maybe the moral of the story here is that bigger, centralized government isn't the answer. Would California and New York be better off if most of their tax dollars never left their states in the first place so they can spend their own money on themselves instead of having to beg for it back?
 
That's certainly true. You can also be a government employee.

As I explained previously, the difference between what a state pays to the federal government and what it receives is not welfare.

I never called it welfare, dope. You keep calling it that.
 
Are you opposed to "freeloaders" or not
LOL...
I've stated so from the beginning of the thread, dope. It took you this long to get that point?
No, you really aren't, because you want to continue actual government welfare programs like food stamps. Buying F-16 fighters is not welfare.
I've said no such thing, loser.
No one failed to notice that you declined endorsing the idea of abolishing actual welfare programs like AFDC.
Why would I do that?
 
1587745587096.png
 
But you love wealth redistribution, so what's the problem?
Do I?

Yes, you do, so you really have nobody but yourself to blame. You're the one who elects these politicians who want more centralized control in D.C. so they can divvy up slices of the pie based on who lobbies them the most or which Congressman has the most seniority. Then you come here and bellyache about "taker states." As I said initially, maybe the moral of the story here is that bigger, centralized government isn't the answer. Would California and New York be better off if most of their tax dollars never left their states in the first place so they can spend their own money on themselves instead of having to beg for it back?

The concept of a taker state does not require whatever the fuck all ^ that was.

The takers are the ones who contribute little to your pie yet recieve a very large slice.
 
But you love wealth redistribution, so what's the problem?
Do I?

Yes, you do, so you really have nobody but yourself to blame. You're the one who elects these politicians who want more centralized control in D.C. so they can divvy up slices of the pie based on who lobbies them the most or which Congressman has the most seniority. Then you come here and bellyache about "taker states." As I said initially, maybe the moral of the story here is that bigger, centralized government isn't the answer. Would California and New York be better off if most of their tax dollars never left their states in the first place so they can spend their own money on themselves instead of having to beg for it back?

The concept of a taker state does not require whatever the fuck all ^ that was.

The takers are the ones who contribute little to your pie yet recieve a very large slice.

Exactly, so why do you keep voting for it and then come back here bitching about the consequences of your vote?
 
Kentucky receives 148 billion more fed money than they put in.
New York puts in $116 billion more than they receive.
Yet Mitch McConnell of Kentucky wants no more federal aide for New York.

Pretty good argument for less government, isn't it? Now you see the problem when the federal government does more than it should.
Kentucky gladly took the money.
Kentucky gladly took the money.
How does that help the argument that government should continue to be all-powerful?

You seem to have missed the point.
.
 
You blew nothing but hot air fool.
LOL...fake mews
I destroyed your widdle link from the failing USA Today. It's a shame. It was once a great brand. I did it with my tremendous and very smart link. People are telling me ....very smart people ...that my link was very true and we have tremendous support globally.

Lets cut to the chase, you lied. Or you are ignorant. Its one of the two.
 

Forum List

Back
Top