Who are the socialists MAGA dislikes? Look in the mirror.

Who are the socialists MAGA dislikes? Look in the mirror.    MAGA screaming about "Federal money helping the poor as redistribution of wealth is the dirty word of socialism, that it is the only reason to stop it, makes a point they might not like. In short, in general, Blue States are the givers to prop up citizens' access to basic needs while the Red States are the takers of federal money to benefit the lives of their citizens they are unwilling or unable to provide on their own.  However, the irony is that the Red States have thrived under Biden's economics in some part because of his legislative initiatives, especially with the ill-named Inflation Reduction Act befitting them more  Red than Blue states. 

https://abcnews.go.com/Business/red-state-economies-surging-biden/story

My column published by Winter Park Times, May 7-8, 2020  https://winterparktimes.com/opinion/columnists/the-takers-and-the-makers-not-what-you-think/

The takers and the makers...It isn't what you or the Tea Party-like folks think. An Atlantic magazine analysis was updated in 2017, though the analysis was first done in 2014. The red states are the takers of the blue states ' federal taxpayers' money.  Per the article, "There are various ways of thinking about what a 'state dependency' map cited in the article tells us. One approach is to shine a light on the red-states-as-takers paradox: Dominated by Republican voters who profess their distaste for the federal government and its social programs, these are the very states that rank highest on the dependency index." This is how Business Insider handled the story: "As it turns out, it is red states that are overwhelmingly the Welfare Queen States. Yes, that's right. Red States—the ones governed by folks who think the government is too big and spending needs to be cut—are a net drain on the economy, taking in more federal spending than they pay out in federal taxes. They talk a good game, but stick Blue States with the bill." https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/05/which-states-are-givers-and-which-are-takers/361668/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=share&fbclid=IwAR1Scz2tEi0lNIQfem3uJawCg8TqJ-eewY9YTmOpQ25BZUATLD4QxoEMzrY
By any measure in the article, Colorado is a maker state, among the lowest tier of states taking federal taxpayer dollars.

     Why are some states takers, not makers?  Simply looking at the various maps and statistics, what pops out is that most of the taking states are red and southern.  The Atlantic conclusion is correct so far as it goes.  The Atlantic article did not go into any detail, but I agree the importance of who holds political power in Congress does play an important role. The Atlantic article places the blame on  Congress members frequently re-elected from safe seats, gaining seniority, and controlling committee chairs. True. They have brought in the pork to their home states.  I have some theories of how this has happened.  More House safe seats have been carved out by rampant gerrymandering, permitting frequent re-election of incumbents and seniority in the House. In the Senate, those from safe seats rule committees and their GOP chairs often hale from the South. For example, Kentucky is in the top ten of the taker states and it is the 4th poorest state in the union.  Ironically,  Kentucky Sen. GOP Majority leader Mitch McConnell, who controls Senate majority votes and committee chairs, is not considered an ideological friend of spending of social programs or making it easier to vote.  Also from Kentucky is Sen. Rand Paul, a libertarian who generally opposes federal spending on social programs. He is much valued in a close vote. Governance of state governments also plays a role. Regardless of ideology, it has not kept Kentucky from being in the top ten takers.  New Mexico and some others ranking high on the poverty list have high native American and Hispanic populations. Many others have large African-American populations.   Often these states are governed by legislatures and governors who are white and conservative and uneager to share power. 
      One more paradox in makers and takers comparisons,  racism is a factor, but not as the racists believe.  More white people get government assistance than any other group of minorities, including African Americans. https://www.lexingtonlaw.com/blog/finance/welfare-statistics.html
Food stamp recipients, in particular, are more white of percentage,  than of a minority race.
   Diving deeper into the issue of political control, there are some underlying factors.  The kinds of economic activity states generate may play a role. However,  with few exceptions, there is also a strong self-perpetuating connection in the South with the poverty rate of the taking states and the percentage of racial minorities, poor health care, and voter suppression. https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/04/race-and-blame/609946/     https://www.healthline.com/health-news/covid-19-affecting-people-of-color    Because of poverty, their needs exceed the will and ability of their state governments to provide so they demand and need federal help.  Many of these states have not expanded Medicaid to their poorer citizens when they had the opportunity under the provisions of Obamacare, keeping the poorer sicker and more expensive to treat. Voter suppression tactics,  making it expensive and inconvenient to register and get transportation to vote, and stringent requirements for government-issued picture IDs from non-drivers,   keep minorities at a political power disadvantage in getting their part of the economic pie. 
https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/05/which-states-are-givers-and-which-are-takers/361668/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=share&fbclid=IwAR1dykQ8kFVoryZ34mclzcjsIKx-qNX-dQMi9RoW0wg7b_lGIblYFIvLlUQ

Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program - Wikipedia

The average gross monthly income per food stamp household is $731; The average net income is $336. 37% of participants are White, 22% are African-American, 10% are Hispanic, 2% are Asian, 4% are Native American, and 19% are of unknown race or ethnicity.    

      

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2019/nov/07/which-us-states-hardest-vote-supression-electio

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/coronavirus-vulnerable-cdc-145303772.html

 https://www.google.com/search?q=states+with+highest+poverty+rate+2020&rlz=1CCEAQE_enUS811US811&oq=states+with+highest+poverty+rate&aqs=chrome.2.69i57j0l7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

https://worldpopulationreview.com/states/states-by-race/

https://www.kff.org/medicaid/issue-brief/status-of-state-medicaid-expansion-decisions-interactive-map/

https://www.governing.com/topics/urban/gov-majority-minority-populations-in-states.htmlRed states in general (exception are states with l large military installations) are  takers of federal money redistributed to them  The Blue stats are sending more tax money to red states to shore up their failure to fund themselves. If that practice should stop, as MAGA and Trump's use of tax money proposes, the MAGA states would become close to third world in the standard of loving and the Blue states would just become richer. Calling Obamacare, feeding kids, propping up social security, and education sMedicare socialism for the reason they should be stopped and left to the states to use their own tax money to do what they want to do it is probably the most self defeating concept and harmful to themselves they could advocate. If Blue states bought into this stupidity, they would be much better off.