5 ms·

Being pretty close to $1/$1 seems about the right, though. If a city can't support itself, it can't support itself, right? Why should it be subsidized? Same go

Being pretty close to $1/$1 seems about the right, though. If a city can't support itself, it can't support itself, right? Why should it be subsidized? Same goes for Florida, for whatever it's worth.

toomuchtodo 11y ago
Because that's how the state/federal financial model works. Some states are a burden (usually poor conservative states), some states pay for more themselves (New York, California, to name the biggest). "From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs." as it were.
- humanrebar 11y ago
  > Some states are a burden (usually poor conservative states) Yeah, I'm not sure the math is simple enough to say that definitively. People from those states are disproportionately represented in the military, for example, and there's no way to add "deaths in overseas wars" to help balance the books. There's also a tendency to count infrastructure projects for states as being for those states. But good highways through the Midwest, for example, are also used for shipping goods coast-to-coast. The locals in Podunk, WY certainly wouldn't choose a superhighway as their first infrastructure project if they were handed 10 million dollars.
  - toomuchtodo 11y ago
    > Yeah, I'm not sure the math is simple enough to say that definitively. Its pretty well studied: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_taxation_and_spending_by_state https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_taxation_and_spending_... http://www.economist.com/blogs/dailychart/2011/08/americas-fiscal-union http://www.economist.com/blogs/dailychart/2011/08/americas-f... > People from those states are disproportionately represented in the military, for example, and there's no way to add "deaths in overseas wars" to help balance the books. Who weren't drafted, and voluntarily went. > There's also a tendency to count infrastructure projects for states as being for those states. But good highways through the Midwest, for example, are also used for shipping goods coast-to-coast. The locals in Podunk, WY certainly wouldn't choose a superhighway as their first infrastructure project if they were handed 10 million dollars. Goods can be delivered to New York and California far more efficiently by water than over the continental US. Flyover country influence continues to wane as citizens continue to migrate to major urban cores.

Being pretty close to $1/$1 seems about the right, though. If a city can't support itself, it can't support itself, right? Why should it be subsidized? Same goes for Florida, for whatever it's worth.

toomuchtodo 11y ago

Because that's how the state/federal financial model works. Some states are a burden (usually poor conservative states), some states pay for more themselves (New York, California, to name the biggest). "From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs." as it were.

humanrebar 11y ago
> Some states are a burden (usually poor conservative states) Yeah, I'm not sure the math is simple enough to say that definitively. People from those states are disproportionately represented in the military, for example, and there's no way to add "deaths in overseas wars" to help balance the books. There's also a tendency to count infrastructure projects for states as being for those states. But good highways through the Midwest, for example, are also used for shipping goods coast-to-coast. The locals in Podunk, WY certainly wouldn't choose a superhighway as their first infrastructure project if they were handed 10 million dollars.
- toomuchtodo 11y ago
  > Yeah, I'm not sure the math is simple enough to say that definitively. Its pretty well studied: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_taxation_and_spending_by_state https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_taxation_and_spending_... http://www.economist.com/blogs/dailychart/2011/08/americas-fiscal-union http://www.economist.com/blogs/dailychart/2011/08/americas-f... > People from those states are disproportionately represented in the military, for example, and there's no way to add "deaths in overseas wars" to help balance the books. Who weren't drafted, and voluntarily went. > There's also a tendency to count infrastructure projects for states as being for those states. But good highways through the Midwest, for example, are also used for shipping goods coast-to-coast. The locals in Podunk, WY certainly wouldn't choose a superhighway as their first infrastructure project if they were handed 10 million dollars. Goods can be delivered to New York and California far more efficiently by water than over the continental US. Flyover country influence continues to wane as citizens continue to migrate to major urban cores.