Deficit spending: that's a good point and I don't know what economists would say. If California has good credit, maybe it would be okay. Given that the state

Deficit spending: that's a good point and I don't know what economists would say. If California has good credit, maybe it would be okay. Given that the state was on the brink of bankruptcy a few years ago, I question their credit-worthiness. However, the situation is like the EU and Greece. Greece ran a deficit big deficit, defaulted, and threatened to bring down the Euro, because Greece cannot print money. California also cannot print money. The US, however, can print money, so it has more flexibility. "Giver state": not relevant for this discussion. The parent post talked about the State of California doing a good job of handling the recovery. The State of California does not give anything to other states (that I am aware of). The people of California pay more in federal income taxes than they collectively get back, but it is the State government that was asserted to be an economic exemplar. (And according to [1], California is not even a huge giver, as it receives about $.95 [guestimated from the bar chart] for every $1 its people pay in federal taxes.) Delaware, New York, Wyoming are also irrelevant. My point is that California is not an obvious shining economic example. Whether DE, NY, and WY are making wise or foolish choices is unrelated to CA's choices. [1] https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/05/which-states-are-givers-and-which-are-takers/361668/ https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/05/which-s...