Those <500 counties were Hitlerey won would include the area around Washington, DC, which boast the highest income in North America. Those counties produce nothing, feed no one, provide no service to the public.
It's a giant sucking black hole of bureaucrats. lobbyists, and regulators who suck the life out of working class white folks.
The only people who are exploited by these bureaucrats are those who actually pay federal taxes to support them without taking equivalent value in return. This rules out most of the red states in the South and the flyover country. And unless somebody confiscates the agricultural products in these states, there is no basis for any resident there to believe that he is exploited by the democrats of the western and eastern coast.
Moreover, it is funny how the states who produce "nothing" have to subsidize through federal taxes the states who produce the "actual" wealth. California consistently has to give "nothing" in terms of dollars to rednecks in republican states of the South or in the flyover country who produce the "real" wealth and still cannot live without federal and mostly "blue states'" subsidizes. Not only that, but these red moochers in "right to work" states legislate conditions of very low minimum wages which makes it impossible for many of their residents to pay any federal income tax. Why do you think almost half of the US households do not pay federal taxes? It is because red moochers have found it convenient to accept the blue state subsidies to fund the so called "freedom to work" with very low wages in their state.https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/03/opin ... .html?_r=0
For complicated reasons — some of which have to do with rural poverty, some of which have to do with the basic physics of supporting infrastructure in low-density regions — a disproportionate amount of per capita federal spending and benefits now flow down to the low-density states. According to a study by the Tax Foundation conducted several years ago, for every dollar New Jersey pays in federal taxes, it receives 61 cents in benefits and other federal spending. For the same dollar of taxes Wyoming spends, it gets $1.11 back.
Put those two trends together and you have a grievance worthy of the original Tea Party: more taxation with less representation. The urban states are subsidizing the rural states, and yet somehow in return, the rural states get more power at the voting booth.
You can represent the injustice of this arrangement mathematically. Think of it as two different kinds of return on investment: how much does each state receive for every dollar it pays in taxes, and how much Electoral College influence does each state get for each vote cast. Take the average of those two data points and you have a measure of which states are getting shortchanged by the system. Call it the disenfranchisement index.
The states that rank at the top of this list are the ones that are paying the highest proportion of the country’s bills while ranking lowest in terms of voting power in the Electoral College. The first 12 on the list have all voted for the Democratic candidate in at least two of the last three elections, and all but two of them went for Mrs. Clinton in 2016: New Jersey, Minnesota, Illinois, Colorado, Massachusetts, New York, Wisconsin, Michigan, Connecticut, California, Washington and Oregon.
Those states make up the overwhelming majority of Hillary Clinton’s Electoral College support in 2016. They are also paying billions of dollars of taxes and receiving only a fraction back in benefits and other federal spending. By contrast, 19 of the 25 most empowered (and largely rural) states went for Mr. Trump.
The gap between the two extremes is remarkable. South Dakota, one of the most empowered states in the country, received almost twice the return on taxes as California, the country’s most populated state, while also commanding nearly twice as much power per capita in the Electoral College. If anyone should be declaring themselves the heirs to the Boston patriots who rebelled against the unjust taxation of King George, it’s the big city blue state citizens who are funding a system that by law undercounts their votes.
And then you have the mootchers lecturing us about exploitation...