GDP by state, by percent of U.S.

[^_^ 5,021]

Something has to be wrong here, considering Mississippi is the poorest state in the Union.

Hold on, let me redo this. I may have inverted something.

I learned in high school that wikipedia is not a reliable source and it will never be accepted as a source for a paper. You can use wikipedia to find other reliable sources. Sometimes there is reliable sources on the related links at the bottom of the page.

I learned in high school that the computer is awesome.

[Amby 490]

I only went to regular high school for one semester. The wikipedia thing is all I learned there

[Ban Hammer 13,656]

Hold on, let me redo this. I may have inverted something.

this isn't your honeymoon

[^_^ 5,021]

Ok, I did screw it up. I said those ratios were GDP share/Pop share but they were actually the inverse.

Here are the correct rankings. Thank you, Boo Yah. Good catch.

District of Columbia 3.51

Delaware 1.51

Alaska 1.49

Wyoming 1.41

Connecticut 1.33

New York 1.27

Massachusetts 1.20

New Jersey 1.18

Virginia 1.09

California 1.08

Minnesota 1.08

Nevada 1.08

Colorado 1.07

Louisiana 1.07

Texas 1.07

Hawaii 1.07

Illinois 1.06

Washington 1.05

North Dakota 1.05

Maryland 1.04

Nebraska 1.00

South Dakota 0.99

New Hampshire 0.98

Iowa 0.98

Rhode Island 0.97

Pennsylvania 0.95

Kansas 0.94

North Carolina 0.92

Wisconsin 0.92

Oregon 0.92

Vermont 0.89

Ohio 0.89

Georgia 0.88

Florida 0.87

Tennessee 0.87

New Mexico 0.86

Oklahoma 0.86

Missouri 0.86

Indiana 0.86

Utah 0.85

Michigan 0.83

Arizona 0.82

Maine 0.82

Montana 0.80

Kentucky 0.79

Alabama 0.78

South Carolina 0.74

Idaho 0.74

Arkansas 0.74

West Virginia 0.73

Mississippi 0.67

[Heracles 417]

I am sure when they taught you how to write a paper in high school, they taught you that not all sources are equal.

I was taught not to disregard every source that does not share my view. It's why I have watched as many liberal news shows as I have watched right wing shows. I then form a opinion based on evaluating both sides of the argument. I do not automatically rule something out because Olbermann or what's her name is saying it. You and your little posse on the other hand cannot get past the messenger.

If Beck or Oreilly says something, your sole focus will be on your opinion of them, than actually discussing the point. Heck you do it on here with various posters. Yet then have the nerve to claim you're open minded.

Trademark of A.J, throw out the insults or jokes when you have nothing legitimate to add, which pretty-much sums up 90% of your posts. For the remaining 10%, you spend them bitching about V.J, or the mods or how you just don't care. Too bad you are on here so much, for someone who does not care.

Edited September 9, 2010 by Heracles

[SuperDuper! 230]

Cali has over 11 million living in poverty and we all know how low the income threshold is to be considered in poverty in the US. Unfortunately I heard this from the governor, so Rob may consider this anecdotal or made up.

Hey Hercules, for all of CA's faults, it still comes in at the 6th largest economy in the world. Yet it is still bankrupt....

[mawilson 2,133]

All blue states are at the top of the list, what a surprise. Big government at work.

[^_^ 5,021]

All blue states are at the top of the list, what a surprise. Big government at work.

[Heracles 417]

Hey Hercules, for all of CA's faults, it still comes in at the 6th largest economy in the world. Yet it is still bankrupt....

That one is easy to figure out, the wealthy are not paying enough taxes and too many service are being utilized free of charge by illegals. $1 billion alone goes to incarcerating illegal aliens for non-immigration based crimes. Apparently you guys also have some prop to limit tax. WTH? Then you have the massive black market of illegal aliens, that A.J and co deny or downplay. Think about the billions lost in tax, now add the billions they use in services.

I guarantee you that if the US was to join the rest of the first world and adopt a GST/VAT, a majority of these tax loopholes would disappear. Australia raked in some decent budgets since the switchover close to ten years ago, which was implemented by us conservatives. California would also save billions by simply residency testing for any government service, as they do in most other first world countries.

Edited September 9, 2010 by Heracles

[^_^ 5,021]

Yes, I deny that California has any illegals at all. Good one, BY.

[Heracles 417]

Yes, I deny that California has any illegals at all. Good one, BY.

More like you guys, or my favorite you people, deny the negative impact its having on the economy. Stevo actually assumes they are a positive for America, because an article or two says so. Ask him to crunch basic numbers and I hear crickets. Apparently numbers are no match for a liberal blog.

Edited September 9, 2010 by Heracles

[^_^ 5,021]

More like you guys, or my favorite you people, deny the negative impact its having on the economy. Stevo actually assumes they are a positive for America, because an article or two says so. Ask him to crunch basic numbers and I hear crickets. Apparently numbers are no match for a liberal blog.

Poor people are a drag on the economy when they're not being utilized (that is, they're not all employed). Most illegals are poor. None of this is rocket science nor is you pointing it out much of a breakthrough.

[mawilson 2,133]

Poor people are a drag on the economy when they're not being utilized (that is, they're not all employed). Most illegals are poor. None of this is rocket science nor is you pointing it out much of a breakthrough.

Poor people are a drag on the economy even when they are employed - they tend to use more

in services than they contribute in taxes. Unemployed illegals just add insult to injury.

[Heracles 417]

Poor people are a drag on the economy when they're not being utilized (that is, they're not all employed). Most illegals are poor. None of this is rocket science nor is you pointing it out much of a breakthrough.

So why would anyone want the importation of even more poverty, rather than utilize and lift the living standard of the 60 million Americans that are considered poor. Closer to 87 million, when using international standards in determining poverty.

[^_^ 5,021]

Poor people are a drag on the economy even when they are employed - they tend to use more

in services than they contribute in taxes. Unemployed illegals just add insult to injury.

They work for less, though. And when illegal, less than the legal min wage. They reduce the cost of doing business.