3 ms·

Which we really, really do.

xenadu02 9y ago
Which was a deliberate "fuck you" by Republicans, attempting to enforce their ideal state tax policy through coercive taxation.
- cryptonector 9y ago
  Well, I mean, it's not like Democrats don't do this sort of thing. It's politics. As someone once said, "elections have consequences", and surely should! And it's a question of fairness too. Should the federal tax code give high-tax State residents a break? Why should it? Or why should it not? These questions have reasonable answers, and reasonable people can disagree.
  - dragonwriter 9y ago
    > Should the federal tax code give high-tax State residents a break? It's not a break, it's mathematically necessary to prevent federal taxation from artificially negating what would otherwise be beneficial social action. Without local tax deductibility, local tax funded programs have artificially reduced net local benefit, which impact is greater the higher the federal income tax rate which is paid by the payers of the state taxes. The result is that, absent full deductibility, there is an artificial incentive (given progressive federal income taxes) not only for lower state taxes and spending even where a tax-funded program would be economically efficient before federal taxation was taken into account, but also for less progressive state taxes than would otherwise be adopted.
- cafard 9y ago
  Well, or a handy way to inflict a bit of pain on the coastal blue states.
- Fjolsvith 9y ago
  Oh yeah? Why, when I live in Kansas, should I have to pay higher taxes to subsidize welfare state residents? Seems to me like its just leveling the playing field.
  - dragonwriter 9y ago
    > Why, when I live in Kansas, should I have to pay higher taxes to subsidize welfare state residents? In federal terms, Kansas is, in fact, heavily subsidized by the states hurt by the SALT change even before the change. The question is why those in California and similar states should have to subsidize their deliberately failed state even more for it's decision not to pay for its own citizens’ needs.
    - Fjolsvith 9y ago
      Maybe people in California are needier than people in Kansas, and the Kansas state government just doesn't have to tax us as much to meet our needs.
cryptonector 9y ago
Who is this "we"? Not all folks here live in high-tax States. Unless... you mean that they all have too-high taxes... I see. Well, but even so, not everyone lives in the higher-taxing States. :)
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]

Which was a deliberate "fuck you" by Republicans, attempting to enforce their ideal state tax policy through coercive taxation.

cryptonector 9y ago
Well, I mean, it's not like Democrats don't do this sort of thing. It's politics. As someone once said, "elections have consequences", and surely should! And it's a question of fairness too. Should the federal tax code give high-tax State residents a break? Why should it? Or why should it not? These questions have reasonable answers, and reasonable people can disagree.
- dragonwriter 9y ago
  > Should the federal tax code give high-tax State residents a break? It's not a break, it's mathematically necessary to prevent federal taxation from artificially negating what would otherwise be beneficial social action. Without local tax deductibility, local tax funded programs have artificially reduced net local benefit, which impact is greater the higher the federal income tax rate which is paid by the payers of the state taxes. The result is that, absent full deductibility, there is an artificial incentive (given progressive federal income taxes) not only for lower state taxes and spending even where a tax-funded program would be economically efficient before federal taxation was taken into account, but also for less progressive state taxes than would otherwise be adopted.
cafard 9y ago
Well, or a handy way to inflict a bit of pain on the coastal blue states.
Fjolsvith 9y ago
Oh yeah? Why, when I live in Kansas, should I have to pay higher taxes to subsidize welfare state residents? Seems to me like its just leveling the playing field.
- dragonwriter 9y ago
  > Why, when I live in Kansas, should I have to pay higher taxes to subsidize welfare state residents? In federal terms, Kansas is, in fact, heavily subsidized by the states hurt by the SALT change even before the change. The question is why those in California and similar states should have to subsidize their deliberately failed state even more for it's decision not to pay for its own citizens’ needs.
  - Fjolsvith 9y ago
    Maybe people in California are needier than people in Kansas, and the Kansas state government just doesn't have to tax us as much to meet our needs.

cryptonector 9y ago

Who is this "we"? Not all folks here live in high-tax States. Unless... you mean that they all have too-high taxes... I see. Well, but even so, not everyone lives in the higher-taxing States. :)

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]