Idaho is up

Only the cool counties like King and Multnomah get to go subsidize the leftist, drug addicted society killing types of poors now..
Cool? I don’t know about that. But I do know that 100s of millions in subsides flow East (not West) over the mountains.
And who do you think is eating all of that subsidized food? You think that would stop? Once again, your pedantic view of economics lacks any sort of second order thinking.
Captain Dunning-Kruger, I salute you
 
Only the cool counties like King and Multnomah get to go subsidize the leftist, drug addicted society killing types of poors now..
Cool? I don’t know about that. But I do know that 100s of millions in subsides flow East (not West) over the mountains.
And who do you think is eating all of that subsidized food? You think that would stop? Once again, your pedantic view of economics lacks any sort of second order thinking.
Captain Dunning-Kruger, I salute you
If it were to stop "Greater Idaho" would be even poorer, so I don't see your point.
 
A new state still gets federal money
Scoreboard
A larger state, not a new one.
The smaller remaining states would get to keep all the federal money they receive and stop subsidizing the self-reliant libertarians of the dirt to boot.
So your view is that a complete overhaul of state boundaries would result in the same federal assistance allocation, including for agricultural subsidies?
Yikes. Next you'll tell me that food prices wouldn't change
 
Last edited:
A new state still gets federal money
Scoreboard
A larger state, not a new one.
The smaller remaining states would get to keep all the federal money they receive and stop subsidizing the self-reliant libertarians of the dirt to boot.
So your view is that a complete overhaul of state boundaries would result in the same federal assistance allocation, including for agricultural subsidies?
Yikes. Next you'll tell me that food prices wouldn't change
It's the same dirt no matter where you draw the lines. But if more agricultural subsidies is your plan for a solvent Greater Idaho, good luck.
 
A new state still gets federal money
Scoreboard
A larger state, not a new one.
The smaller remaining states would get to keep all the federal money they receive and stop subsidizing the self-reliant libertarians of the dirt to boot.
So your view is that a complete overhaul of state boundaries would result in the same federal assistance allocation, including for agricultural subsidies?
Yikes. Next you'll tell me that food prices wouldn't change
It's the same dirt no matter where you draw the lines. But if more agricultural subsidies is your plan for a solvent Greater Idaho, good luck.
H is a big solvent government guy.
 
Back
Top