3 ms·
> California usually complains its taxed pop sends more money in than it receives in federal largesse. This isn't incompatible with what I said. California pa
by NotAnEconomist 8y ago
> California usually complains its taxed pop sends more money in than it receives in federal largesse.
This isn't incompatible with what I said.
California pays more than it receives, but less than it should given the benefits that it receives (and the agreed upon national tax rate).
It's good that SALT has been limited, and the investment that the US has made in certain urban environments (eg, founding Silicon Valley) will be properly distributed across the country instead of hoarded by the states where those investments were made.
- 0xffff2 8y ago>California pays more than it receives, but less than it should given the benefits that it receives How are you measuring benefits received if not by dollars received?
- eropple 8y agoThere is a multiplier effect to money received, for sure. But that fits into an observation that a friend of mine once made: it's a lot easier to get things done in a place where things already work (mostly) correctly. Which, incidentally, is why I'm pretty happy with my state being a net payer. I want things to be better for everybody. But a little gratitude would be nice.