3 ms·
==Thus it would likely suffice to just use federal prosecutions to burn the corruption out of the local governments, remove the legacies of past corruption, and
by moorhosj 8y ago
==Thus it would likely suffice to just use federal prosecutions to burn the corruption out of the local governments, remove the legacies of past corruption, and let the remaining citizens try again from scratch.==
What is this based on?
Why isn't the solution to use federal investigators to determine why certain states aren't paying enough taxes to cover their costs? That sounds kind of "corrupt" to me.
- logfromblammo 8y agoProbably because federal funds go out mainly according to population counts, and taxes come in based on who makes the most money. The places that spend more taxes than they remit are either too poor to pay more tax, or they have relentlessly selfish representatives that won't vote yes on anything unless it also includes a job for their district. It's pretty easy to tell the difference.
- moorhosj 8y ago==Probably because federal funds go out mainly according to population counts== This isn't true at all. California, Texas, New York and Illinois are 4 of the 6 largest states by population and all of them pay more in taxes then they receive back from the government. ==they have relentlessly selfish representatives that won't vote yes on anything unless it also includes a job for their district.== Is this not a form of corruption?