• ComradeSalad@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    3 months ago

    900 divided by 50 is 18 billion. Nevada has one of the lowest populations in the United States. So 36 billion makes no sense even it was proportional to population.

    • Dolores [love/loves]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      Nevada is 24th of the states, hardly ‘lowest’. but without recreating their whole budget on the back of an envelope i would assume the very lowest states would get less than a 50th, freeing up larger shares for other states. Nevada particularly might be pegged for a greater energy investment than it locally needs, because they’re well positioned to host solar that can be sent to surrounding states.

      • ComradeSalad@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        You looked up the wrong statistic. Nevada is 24th in income rank, which is pushed mainly by Las Vegas. Nevada is 32nd in population. Making 35 billion wildly disproportionate.

        • Dolores [love/loves]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          3 months ago

          24th in income rank

          remarkable confluence because i did not look up income by accident. my mistake was thinking the territories in the wikipedia table were not included in the number rank because their entries in the table don’t have a number displayed. but it is actually counted which offsets the states’ relative positions. just put them into a different table, damn.

          anyway i couldn’t find an actual budget document, just the 90% cut to the military on their website so who knows what arithmetic is behind this promise to Nevada.

          • ComradeSalad@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            They mention it in the opening of the Wikipedia article since you mentioned it.

            Also further down in the same table you referenced it is mentioned.

            I’m still confused as to where you got the 24th number, if it wasn’t from confusing the income rank for population rank.

            • Dolores [love/loves]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              3 months ago

              the US states and territories sorted by population, not Nevada’s page. but apparently the territories’ numbers not appearing on that table is only on the new dark mode, not the normal white layout of the page