DE, MA, and IL are all +5, but the color coding is inconsistent.
Very curious about Oregon as a resident. We're a tiny economy and population relative to CA or even WA, but surprised a bit by this; wonder if there are agricultural subsidies that relative to our economy tip this that much?
Looks like older than national average population, receiving those elderly benefits. And after that is BLM, with fire suppression of all those beautiful forests you have on federal lands being a main driver there.
Do you have a link to the source data on IRS? Surprised to hear we have an older than avg population, federal forest spending...shocked to hear they spend anything.
Are these percentages weighted per capita? I wonder how each states population affects these numbers
Sounds like they are weighted by state gdp, but that seems less than ideal because a state that has very little industry and which doesn't provide many services has a suppressed gdp compared to other states.
Also what the heck type of measurement is net federal money flow per share of state gdp. That's a really overly specific way of wording things and it seems like an easy way to be technically correct but hide a bunch of shit off to the side.