The US Federal Government, State and local governments do not collect data on race and tax revenue. So this data here is based on multiple sources to come up with an estimate of net fiscal impact of races in the United States. The overall spending and revenue data includes State, Federal and Local tax revenue and spending from 2018. All data is from 2018 unless otherwise stated.

So first I will present what I define as “the best estimate” straight away, and then I will explain how I got to these numbers:

Fiscal Impact by Racial Group (Billions)

In addition, if you took the white US population, and assigned to them the entire military budget, they would still run a (small) surplus:

Fiscal Situation of “White America” with a Military of the Current Size

This is a striking fact. Whites in the US would be (just barely) running budget surpluses even if all of the military spending of the current US Federal Government, in absolute terms, is assigned to whites. As you will see, this takes into account the high medicare and social security use of whites as well.

So how did I come to this? Well we don’t have direct data on tax revenue by race from the Federal Government. However, there are private organizations that calculate tax revenue by income bracket:

We also have government data on race and income bracket:

Percent of Each Racial Group by Income Quintile and top 5%

Wonderful, with this we can estimate how much each race pays in taxes based on their percentages in each bracket:

Total Revenue Estimated based on Non-Interpolated Income Bracket Placement by Race

Wait a minute, aren’t these numbers different than the ones I presented above? Yes, that’s because this data isn’t interpolated. The problem here is that these are very large chunks. We get the average contributions within each bracket, but we don’t see the effects at say the 1 percentile, the 86 percentile, et cetera. And so what a linear interpolation is just filling in the gaps between the known and unknown data:

Visual of the Gaps between Income Bracket Percentages

And so looking at that graph, it’s almost certain that whites within each bracket, for example, have higher incomes than the blacks within the same brackets. This is because the black trendline is down, and so, unless there is some radical deviation from linearity, this down trend will exist WITHIN each of these brackets, not just between them. And the income data presented above only takes into account number within each bracket, not their distribution within each bracket.

And so I estimated these effects through linear interpolation. That’s basically filling in the empty percentiles from the points we know, by just assuming a linear trend between each point.

And so the linearly interpolated data looks like this:

Visual of Linearly Interpolated Income Bracket Estimates

So by doing this, we get much more granulated estimates. And so long as there isn’t radical deviation in linearity between the known data points, this will give us a more accurate idea of tax revenue in the US.

(This is a simplified version of how video codec’s can take 30 fps footage and bump it up to 60 fps. Of course they’re filling proportionately less space (50% interpolation vs. 95% interpolation), but they also have a much more complex problem to solve.)

Now I’m interpolating down to 1 percentile. You could go further than this but given the change from 5 reference points to 100 reference points, I don’t think going further would result in meaningful change from this.

And by this method, the racial disparities in income tax revenue are increased somewhat:

Interpolated Revenue Estimates by Race

These results were smaller than I expected. It is bordering on meaningless. In hindsight I wouldn’t have spent the time to do this.

From here on, I’m going to just be using the interpolated revenue. However, as you will see, the main conclusions and big picture don’t change much.

(“Why are you using these income ranges? I’ve seen data breaking down the top 1% and the preceding 4%. Why don’t you include that breakdown BEFORE interpolating?” Because that data is for Federal Income Tax returns. It doesn’t include all forms of taxation, nor does it include state and local tax revenue.)

So there we have revenue. Next we should look at government consumption. In 2018, whites were 60.4% of the population, but actually consumed 61.06% of government , and this higher consumption of whites was driven entirely by social security payments.

You could remove social security, taxes and revenue, from the equation, but since whites pay a similarly proportionate share of social security taxes, the effects of doing this are negligible.

The reality is that Social Security is a form of welfare paid for by taxes. The “trust fund” is bankrupt and reliant on annual tax revenues, and so it is functionally just another tax and spend welfare program, regardless of what some politicians in the past said it would be.

Now you can see two categories, “equal” and “variable” government. Equal government is actually most of the government. For example, school spending per pupil is basically identical for the races. Now you can say it’s spent better on whites, we need to adjust for cost of living or blacks have more special needs, and that’s a whole topic that can be talked about another time.

In addition things like roads, defense, administration, the DMV – all of this is assumed to be equally used by members of each race.

Because take “cost of living”. Okay, whites are more likely to live in rural areas where a dollar goes further. But by living in such areas, they also earn less, and that depresses how much they can earn and thus pay in taxes. And in brute terms, the amount that blacks and hispanics are costing Federal, State and Local budgets on education is almost exactly the same as whites. And that’s all that matters in terms of budget impact. This is not a discussion on who has more dollars spent on school in real terms.

The government functions I identified as variable government, that would likely vary between the races, are these:

These are the budgets of these government services, and usage by race (sources in description). Usage of cops, courts and prisons by blacks may be seen as unfair and not a service to blacks, however, this essay is not about actual benefits, it’s about the fiscal impact of racial groups. And like with education, the brute fact is that blacks are costing more money by overloading these government agencies, fairly or unfairly. And so we can convert these percentile numbers into absolute number:

With this data, we can come up with assignment of government usage by race based on variable and “equal” government:

Fiscal Impact with “Variable Government” and “Equal Government” Breakdowns

And so from this, we see that whites, despite constituting only 60.4% of the population, make up 62% of variable government spending, and this is driven almost mostly by social security and to a lesser extent by medicare. The social security numbers also take into account SSI payments, which whites take proportionately less of and this dampens how much whites overuse social security compared to other races. Whites use social security at a higher rate, and also have more benefits per person, but SSI transfers almost exactly offset the higher social security payout per user whites get. The result being that the total amount of money each race gets corresponds almost exactly with the number receiving any benefits. I don’t know if this is just some giant coincidence or by design.

And so with all these pieces in place, we can finally do the fiscal effects of each group:

Fiscal Impact by Racial Group in the United States

However, say blacks, hispanics, and asians, who are substantial contributors to the budget deficit or surplus, didn’t exist in the US. That the US was just white people.

Well first off, the amount of income earned by whites would probably be the same. This is based on there being no relation to the percentages of non-whites in a state and income after adjusting for cost of living:

White Median Real Income in 2017 by State and Percentage White

Now an all-white US would be a more rural US. And so while the nominal GDP would be $14 trillion, the real GDP would be about $14.7 trillion in terms of what those dollars could purchase vs. what current US dollars can purchase, which is about 5% more.

I.e. the dollar would be stronger because white people get more for their dollar because white people more often live in rural areas. And so if blacks, hispanics and asians didn’t exist in the US, the dollar would be stronger (which isn’t necessarily a good or bad thing).

While this is irrelevant to current fiscal impact, since federal budgets are done purely on nominal terms (you pay taxes in dollars, regardless of how much you can get with those dollars), an all-white US would be a rural-shift, which means US Real GDP (Purchasing power parity) would only decline 26.5%, not 30%. Though nominal GDP would decline 30%.

Also keep in mind that the wealthiest whites live in places like New York City and Los Angeles, which have a higher black and/or hispanic population than the US overall, and so even if there were a relation between black and hispanic populations and higher white incomes, it wouldn’t necessarily be causal. It could just be a reflection of the rotten high-low nature of cities.

I was worried that there may be some relation between the presence of blacks and hispanics and higher white incomes due to urbanites having higher incomes (this is true in 90+% white cities in Europe as well), and would have to point out that you don’t know if it’s causal because Urban incomes. But luckily, there is no relation anyway so it’s not even an issue.

But the point is that there is no boost to white incomes by the presence of blacks and hispanics, or Asians. Some white people gain, some lose. But on balance, the effect is nil.

Which means it is appropriate to simply add and subtract fiscal impact.

Of course if all hispanics, blacks and asians were just instantly disappeared from the current US, there would enormous economic problems because the economy would have all these holes constituting 40% of the labor force. I’m simply saying this is approximately what the US Economy would be like if those people were never in the US at all and the economy developed with just white people. It would be smaller, but wealthier per-person, real estate would be a about 30% cheaper, as would rent presumably, it would be much less crowded, working-class wages would be higher and the wealthiest wouldn’t be as wealthy due to not having as much cheap labor. The US would look a lot more like Denmark.

So lets look at the budget of “White America”. I don’t for a moment believe white america would spend less on the military in absolute terms than it does today, since all racial groups in the US are about equally in favor of military spending. Militarism in the US is a pan-racial attitude. So would White America still run a balanced budget even if military spending was at the same absolute level? Why yes! Take a look.

Fiscal Impact of White America with a Military of the Current Size

Hark, a surplus! Just barely, but as surplus nonetheless.

But there’s even more to this. In 2018, interest payments on the national debt were $433.7 billion. If blacks and hispanics didn’t exist in the US say starting in 1950, based on current information, there would be a smaller national debt and thus lower interest payments today. Obviously some of that debt was a function of World War 1 and 2, and so it’s not like there would be NO national debt in white America. But it would be less to some degree that I can’t be arsed to quantify.

Just an experiment, lets see how much these results, with all the work I did, differ from a simpler method of just assuming “equal government” for everything – no breakdowns for welfare, public service use or social security. Just assume each race uses government at the same rate. And then use non-interpolated data on tax revenue.

Grug Analysis Assuming Equal Government and Non-Interpolated Revenue

So, all of my deeper analysis doesn’t yield results meaningfully different from just using non-interpolated tax revenue and then just assuming equal government usage for everyone. Interpolating the tax revenue makes whites look better, breaking down the government spending makes whites look worse, and they basically even out.

So it’s telling that even with this debt that was, in part, accrued by deficits caused by blacks and hispanics, a White America would STILL be running a budget surplus while not cutting the military one cent. And while Asians substantially contribute to the budget, they are not necessary for balanced budgets – whites can do that on their own, even with the bloated military budget and white usage of social security benefits.

So to all the conservative deficit hawks who say we need to run balanced budgets, I have news for you: we already are. We as in white people, already are.

The entire budget deficit, along with some proportion of the national debt itself, are a function of black and hispanic populations. The net effect of these two populations, even after taking away all military spending from them, costs the US $822.5 billion per year. Keep in mind that some proportion of black and hispanic income comes from blacks and hispanics in the military.

More of these people means this number goes up. It is very expensive to have these people in your country. And countries made up entirely or almost entirely of these people have constant financial problems, and discussions about Hispanic countries center around debt and currency devaluations and the IMF, and African countries center around those same things but also lots of talk about “foreign aid” and “emergency relief”. That’s what countries made up entirely of these people look like.

And it doesn’t matter if their constitution is virtually a carbon-copy of the US’ as in the case of Liberia, or if they went to US schools, of if they’re in France or the UK (blacks have similar fiscal impacts in those countries as well), whenever you interact with these people, it’s going to cost you lots and lots of money.

And while I’m one of those horrible people who thinks it’s genetic, practically speaking that’s irrelevant because it has proven to be unchangeable. And so this is why immigration needs to be stopped, not legal or illegal, but immigration, period, needs to be stopped, or at least one of the reasons, and that reason is the economic health of the United States.

US Government Revenue in 2018:

https://www.usgovernmentrevenue.com/year_revenue_2018USbn_21bs1n#usgs302

US Government Spending in 2018:

https://www.usgovernmentspending.com/year_spending_2018USbn_21bs2n#usgs302

Racial Distribution of Income Brackets:

https://www.census.gov/data/tables/time-series/demo/income-poverty/cps-hinc/hinc-05.html

Tax Payment by Bracket:

https://itep.org/who-pays-taxes-in-america-in-2018/

Income By Race and State:

https://www.census.gov/search-results.html?q=median+income&page=1&stateGeo=none&searchtype=web&cssp=SERP

Medicare Usage by Race:

https://www.kff.org/medicare/state-indicator/medicare-beneficiaries-by-raceethnicity/?currentTimeframe=0&sortModel=%7B%22colId%22:%22Location%22,%22sort%22:%22asc%22%7D

Medicaid Usage by Race:

https://www.kff.org/medicaid/state-indicator/medicaid-enrollment-by-raceethnicity/?currentTimeframe=0&sortModel=%7B%22colId%22:%22Location%22,%22sort%22:%22asc%22%7D

Social Security Usage by Race in 2017:

https://books.google.com/books?id=g8VWDwAAQBAJ&pg=RA10-PA2002&lpg=RA10-PA2002&dq=Social+Security+Recipients+by+Age,+Sex,+Race,+and+Hispanic+Origin+2017&source=bl&ots=6lrbUZJ7uP&sig=ACfU3U2S9AqC3gfhTwKl7577fpY8-_eXPQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj73vKUu6boAhVeJDQIHVUtAiEQ6AEwBnoECAkQAQ#v=onepage&q=Social%20Security%20Recipients%20by%20Age%2C%20Sex%2C%20Race%2C%20and%20Hispanic%20Origin%202017&f=false

Cost of Living by State:

https://worldpopulationreview.com/states/cost-of-living-index-by-state/

Percent White by State:

https://www.governing.com/gov-data/census/state-minority-population-data-estimates.html