May 17, 2005

THE LOINS' DEN (via Jason Johnson):

Utahns supersize their families, too: Nation's biggest: Millard County is the champ, other state locales not far behind (Lesley Mitchell, 5/17/05, The Salt Lake Tribune)
In other parts of the country, Kary and Susan Kesler of Fillmore might be hard-pressed to find anyone who knows what it is like to raise 10 kids.

But not where they live in Millard County, home to the most supersized families in the country.

Out of 3,140 counties nationwide, taxpayers in this central Utah county claim the highest average number of exemptions on their federal tax returns, according to an analysis of Internal Revenue Service data by Syracuse University's Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse.

"Lots of exemptions means lots of kids," said Salt Lake City CPA Stephen Hatch.

Millard County had an average of 2.91 exemption claims per tax return filed in 2003, the highest of any U.S. county, the report showed. Utah also took the No. 2 spot, with Sanpete County's average of 2.90 exemptions.

Third on the list is Shannon County in South Dakota, followed by Idaho's Franklin County.

Juab County in Utah rounded out the top 5.

In all, 18 Utah counties made the top 50 - more than any other state. Texas was second with 12. Most Utah counties on the list are rural, although three are along the Wasatch Front: Utah County (No. 10), Tooele (31) and Davis (33).

And what U.S. county took the least number of exemptions per return? Pitkin County in Colorado, home of the upscale city of Aspen, with an average of 1.58 exemptions claimed per return.
And so shall the Red breed the Blue into oblivion.

Posted by Orrin Judd at May 17, 2005 1:42 PM

No, it is the Blue who are non-breeding themselves into oblivion.

Posted by: Robert Schwartz at May 17, 2005 2:29 PM

Don't be so confident. You have to be rich to live in Aspen. Most rich people in this country are past the age of having young children in their homes, so they don't take exemptions. Plus, having young children makes living in Aspen too expensive.

Posted by: Brandon at May 17, 2005 2:48 PM

Reminds me of the Secret Irish Catholic Plan for World Domination: have 10 kids in each family. In thirty, forty generations tops, we'll have the rest of you outnumbered. Bwahahahahaha!

Posted by: Mike Morley at May 17, 2005 2:55 PM

Immigration legal and illegal acts to prop up the Blue staters. For example, from the last census it's estimated California's electoral votes increased by six votes from illegal immigration alone (9 votes including legal immigration), an increase larger than Utah's total electoral vote of five. The influx of immigrants drives out the types of voters who vote Republican (families fleeing degraded schools and the related expensive real estate), and leaves behind types more likely to be liberal (as those without children can continue to afford to live there). The presence of illegals and non-citizen immigrants leverages the votes of these predominantly liberal citizens who stay behind. So because of illegal immigrants, a pair of rich homosexualists living in LA not only get cheap lawn care, they are able to balance the political influence of red staters with large families.

Posted by: carter at May 17, 2005 3:36 PM

Who did TX, FL, AZ, & NM vote for in '04?

Posted by: oj at May 17, 2005 3:41 PM

Mike - Shhhh. Somebody gave the Palestinians a copy of the secret plan. We don't want that to happen again.

Posted by: pj at May 17, 2005 3:44 PM

You don't get OJ's header unless you read it carefully. When I did, I almost snarfed my drink.

Posted by: Tom at May 17, 2005 3:58 PM

6 of the top 8 states by Hispanic population (the only 8 states with Hispanic population more than 10% of total) were red in 2004 (NM, TX, AZ, CO, FL, NV). CA (#2) and NY (#6) were the exceptions. New York Hispanics are a totally different group than recent immigrants.

Posted by: pj at May 17, 2005 4:14 PM

The +2 electoral votes gained by Florida and +1 by Texas from their non-citizen populations are outweighed by California's (which has more than twice as many illegals as Texas does) +9 and New Yorks +3 from the last apportionment.

Bush barely won Nevada and New Mexico.

Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Arkansas, Indiana, , Montana, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Utah each had one fewer electoral vote because of immigration. Who did those states vote for?

Posted by: carter at May 17, 2005 4:51 PM

pj: if you've got enough data to hand, subtract the Hispanic vote & see how much redder or bluer those six states turn.

Posted by: joe shropshire at May 17, 2005 4:56 PM

New York lost two last time and will lose two more in 2010.

Posted by: oj at May 17, 2005 5:34 PM

"You have to be rich to live in Aspen. ... Plus, having young children makes living in Aspen too expensive."


Posted by: Robert Schwartz at May 17, 2005 8:57 PM