> I've seen horrible parents at all income levels.

Equally distributed?

I'm just showing you how expensive this program might be, since you said you don't have even rough figures.

To put it into perspective, $612B is twice the size of Medicare tax collections, and those tax collections are a 12.4% tax on income.

Not even roughly? Is it a $1B program or 3 orders of magnitude larger a $1T program?

I have some rough numbers in my head. There are currently 23 million children between 0 and 5 years old. This does not account for the fact that full day kindergarten is not available everywhere, and even school is not full day, so it would require additional care. Let's multiply 23 by 50% to roughly account for those older children.

How much would full time care cost when funded through a state program? Probably significantly more than private daycare costs now, since there is barely any profit margin in those businesses, and there are complaints that daycare workers are nor paid living wages.

So let's say $18K per child with all overhead. That adds up to $621B annually.

There are roughly 125M households in the USA, and half of them don't pay any federal taxes. That comes out to roughly $10,000 in extra taxes per tax paying household. Every year.

Do you think there is correlation between poor parenting and not being able to afford kids?

That's wrong think. You should be ashamed.

Do you have a rough figure of what this program will cost and how it will be funded?

This seems like the first step in proposing a government run program.

> At no point was I talking about net profits. Just revenue.

Please stop embarrassing yourself any further.

> The CEO of Aramark, one of the city’s biggest employers? A company whose HQ is in Philly and makes 14.6 billion annually?

You were literally talking about profits. You were talking how Aramark, a national company, somehow extracts billions of profits from Philadelphia.

Have a good say sir. This conversation where you just make things up is clearly unproductive. You can keep thinking Philadelphia supports the whole state. Maybe even the whole country.

> I know that nationwide it's the case that cities financially support the rural areas. Welfare, food stamps, medicaid, all used by substantially larger percentage of the population in rural areas than in cities.

This is a myth. Not based on data.

Philadelphia has 12% of the population of the state, but 21% of all HUD funded housing is in Philadelphia. The ratios are the same for other benefits that you listed, since qualification for them would be similar as housing subsidies.

> Huh, I did make a mistake. I didn’t see their most recent annual report, which has upped the figure to 16.3 billion in revenue.

Do you know the difference between revenue and profit?

Aramark made $194M in profit in 2022, lost -$91M in 2021, lost -$462M in 2020.

So in the last 3 years they made no profits, but lost -$359M.

You said they make $14.6B in profit. So clearly you have no clue about finances whatsoever. Even the basics.

And this is precisely how a lot of people think Philadelphia supports the whole state.

> The CEO of Aramark, one of the city’s biggest employers? A company whose HQ is in Philly and makes 14.6 billion annually?

Everything you say is nonsense. It's just made up.

But let's pick just one thing. Can you prove the 14.6 billion figure?

You are having a separate conversation with yourself.

The matter of the fact is that residents in the city of Philadelphia receive far more in benefits from the state and the feds than they ever create with their own labor.

To put it even more simply, to maintain the current level of poverty that the city is in, it needs many billions of dollars from people that live somewhere else. The city does not support anyone else. It can't even pay its own bills.

The data clearly supports it.

The city receives $1.3 billion/year in SNAP benefits alone.

> In 2015, the local government bodies serving Philadelphia collected $3,004 per capita in local taxes, the fifth-highest total among the 30 cities. This figure includes taxes on income, sales, property, and businesses, on residents and nonresidents; the City of Philadelphia imposes a broader range of taxes than most other municipalities. The local governments serving Philadelphia received $6,303 per capita in revenue from all sources, including state and federal aid

https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/reports/2019/03/20/the-cost-of-local-government-in-philadelphia

This is clear evidence the city can't sustain itself, by a wide margin, let alone support anyone else.

Federal and state tax collections from the city do not even approach to cover the $3,299 per capita subsidy that the city receives.

> Either way, that guy was being a douche and being dismissive toward the rest of the state's contributors.

If he was right, that Philadelphia does support the state, he would be a douche and dismissive.

But he's wrong. And not a little wrong.

The city of Philadelphia is not self sustaining, but requires many billions of dollars of outside support just to maintain current status quo.

> Is it just a coincidence that a massive percentage of Philly’s workforce is commuting from neighboring counties?

That's just not true. Factually not true.

When you subtract the people commuting outside of Philadelphia for jobs from people commuting into Philadelphia for job, the total number of workers is quite small compared the total workforce in the region.

So the idea that surrounding counties have no self sustaining economies of their own is absurd.

> Who doesn't consider those counties part of the Philadelphia area?

Again, the conversation is clearly about the city of Philadelphia itself.

> If Philly were able to remove itself from the state you would see very quickly everything in Philly would get better. Those hick towns wouldn't be able to do anything without all the sales tax philly sends to Harrisburg.

This idea presumes that the neighboring counties would send all their taxes to the the city of Philadelphia, instead of the whole state, thus Philadelphia would make out like a bandit.

I imagine if this ever was up for a public vote, the only people that would vote for it would live inside Philadelphia.

> Without Philadelphia, the wealthy commuter counties surrounding Philadelphia would also be “hick towns”

I think this thread might be about you. Stating something that is clearly delusional.

> I don’t consider the main line Philly.

Nobody does. They are separate cities/towns by any definition.

> This one is a little tricky - finding out which counties contribute more tax dollars than they deliver to the state is public information.

It's not just the state contributing. It's federal tax money also.

The city of Philadelphia barely pays any federal taxes, but is clearly a recipient of billions of dollars of federal aid through gigantic programs like HUD, Medicaid and SNAP.

The totality of aid received from the state and federal FAR outstrips what is collected in taxes.

But yet, many people think Philadelphia supports "those hick towns". All data shows that the city is effectively bankrupt if not for huge inflows of money from other places.

In the context of the original quoted comment, none of those counties would form any kind of economic or governmental union with the city of Philadelphia.

It's not just one conversation. It's a recurring idea that gets repeated by many people and repeated often. Mass delusion?

> philly resident's would generate $1,975,154,125 in state income tax

But do they? Let's do some rough math. And this is fairly easy since both the city wage tax and the state income taxes are not progressive with virtually no exemptions.

> The wage tax accounts for 45% of Philadelphia’s annual revenue, and is expected to decline by about $78 million this fiscal year — despite an increase in the nonresident rate. While it’s difficult to determine how much of that loss is due to furloughs and layoffs as opposed to remote work, the city typically collects 40% of its roughly $1.5 billion in annual wage taxes from nonresidents.

https://www.inquirer.com/business/philadelphia-wage-business-tax-coronavirus-remote-work-20210124.html

Total income wage tax collected is "roughly" $1.5B, 60% of which is from city residents, so $0.9B. The resident wage tax was 3.8398%, meaning city residents had $23.4B of earned wages. If the tax rate in PA is 3.07%, then they paid $720M in state income taxes.

$720M vs. $1.98B

That's almost 3 times less. How could they support the state?

> the mayor could be forced to resign if the council finds moral turpitude, which is defined as an act that gravely violates the sentiment of the accepted standards of the community

If I know anything about Upper Darby, accepted community standards are much lower than a little minor DUI.

Very likely someone went to another dentist that found some "issues" with the implant and it was reported up.

> Medicare fraud of $80 MILLION!? Holy shit.

More than $80M. That's the thing. Imagine how much fraud there is for smaller amounts that will never be discovered, prosecuted and partially clawed back.

Medicare/Medicaid are huge systems where there is little incentive to discover fraud. Nobody gets a huge bonus if they find fraud. And that's why big government run programs have this stereotype about them that they are mismanaged and rife with fraud. And rightfully so.