3 ms·
> Isn't that just because there are higher incomes in the blue states, and isn't it a democratic policy to tax higher incomes and transfer wealth to those with
by runako 8y ago
> Isn't that just because there are higher incomes in the blue states, and isn't it a democratic policy to tax higher incomes and transfer wealth to those with lower incomes?
I think part of the issue is that this situation didn't arise in a vacuum.
Some states (generally, "low income" states) pretty explicitly choose to not well-fund communal aspects of society (schools, etc.). Other states (generally, "high income" states) choose to fund communal programs at a higher level. This is where the states are running 50 experiments in the "laboratory of government."
It turns out that after a few generations of the experiment, having better schools (for example) leads to higher incomes and vice versa.
This aspect of the tax bill basically seeks to undo (or at least make more expensive) the strategy that has been shown to correlate with higher incomes.
Some of the architects of this plan would also like to nationalize a healthcare strategy that has been shown in dozens of states to correlate with worse health outcomes.
- kbutler 8y agoCorrelation vs causation. I'd assert that it's much more the "urban vs rural" difference that accounts for the income disparity, with the network effects of cities providing more economic benefit. This economic advantage existed long before our public school system. You'd have to have provide pretty powerful evidence to demonstrate that the quality of public schools in the cities is responsible for the economic benefits of cities. For example, on this list, New York has only average quality schools, and California is well below average. https://www.forbes.com/sites/reneemorad/2018/07/31/states-with-the-best-public-school-systems/#3c65f50e3897 https://www.forbes.com/sites/reneemorad/2018/07/31/states-wi...
- smileysteve 8y ago> It turns out that after a few generations of the experiment, having better schools (for example) leads to higher incomes and vice versa. It's the vice versa, and the vice versa alone. The ranking algorithms have been publicized. Higher incomes lead real estate industry ranking schools better, leads to better education.