4 ms·

Balance of payments includes federal programs like snap, medicaid, and social security [1]. None of that has anything to do with the state's balance sheet. > I

Balance of payments includes federal programs like snap, medicaid, and social security [1]. None of that has anything to do with the state's balance sheet. > It's the more-blue states that you seem to be criticizing that keep the rest of the more-red states afloat This is not true. Almost all spending is deficit, the government is not taxes in, taxes out. In fact, the surplus generated by every net-positive state is consumed many times over by a single state: Virginia [0]. Last I checked Virginia leans blue, but again, it is utterly irrelevant. [0]: https://rockinst.org/issue-areas/fiscal-analysis/balance-of-payments-portal/ https://rockinst.org/issue-areas/fiscal-analysis/balance-of-... [1]: https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/502321-no-blue-states-do-not-bailout-red-states https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/502321-no-blue-states-do...

throw0101a 5y ago
From your article: > These are the exact same states with the lowest and highest balance of payment ratios, respectively. It is hypocritical to decry the tax code for taxing high-income states more than low income states while intentionally designing tax policies with that effect. The above is an example of a tax code that is progressive. Plenty of red-leaning folks, including Rand Paul or KY, want a flat tax. The very progressiveness that helps their states is what they attack: > As a lower-income state, Kentucky receives the full benefit of federal programs like Medicare, but pays relatively little in income or payroll taxes, so it gets much more than it pays in. And that is actually how the social safety net is supposed to work. We want individuals who for whatever reason are hurting financially to receive support from the more fortunate, which necessarily implies large transfers from rich states like New Jersey to lower-income states like Kentucky. > What’s not OK is when states that are huge net beneficiaries of progressive taxation and the social safety net preen and posture about self-reliance and the evils of big government. It’s even worse when they assert some kind of moral superiority over the metropolitan areas that pay their bills. * https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/14/opinion/kentucky-tornado-federal-aid.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/14/opinion/kentucky-tornado-... * https://archive.md/ExBqu https://archive.md/ExBqu The The Hill article linked to also references ALEC (American Legislative Exchange Council), which also is pushing for a non-progressive flat tax: * https://www.alec.org/model-policy/flat-tax-option-act/ https://www.alec.org/model-policy/flat-tax-option-act/ ALEC, while labeled as "non-partisan", certainly has clear leaning (as it's original under §History illustrate): > ALEC has produced model bills on a broad range of issues, such as reducing regulation and individual and corporate taxation, combating illegal immigration, loosening environmental regulations, tightening voter identification rules, weakening labor unions, and opposing gun control.[8][9][10][11] * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Legislative_Exchange_Council https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Legislative_Exchange_...
Acrobatic_Road 5y ago
Not only that, but these statistics that always get cited leave out federal subsidy of state and municipal bonds through tax exemption of interest payments - allowing states to pay less than they would otherwise. And the states with most the most taxpayer supported debt (both state and municipal) tend to be blue states. The explicit purpose of this system is to reduce the debt burden for state and local governments, yet its not considered a subsidy by these stats because the federal government isn't directly giving anyone money.

throw0101a 5y ago

From your article: > These are the exact same states with the lowest and highest balance of payment ratios, respectively. It is hypocritical to decry the tax code for taxing high-income states more than low income states while intentionally designing tax policies with that effect. The above is an example of a tax code that is progressive. Plenty of red-leaning folks, including Rand Paul or KY, want a flat tax. The very progressiveness that helps their states is what they attack: > As a lower-income state, Kentucky receives the full benefit of federal programs like Medicare, but pays relatively little in income or payroll taxes, so it gets much more than it pays in. And that is actually how the social safety net is supposed to work. We want individuals who for whatever reason are hurting financially to receive support from the more fortunate, which necessarily implies large transfers from rich states like New Jersey to lower-income states like Kentucky. > What’s not OK is when states that are huge net beneficiaries of progressive taxation and the social safety net preen and posture about self-reliance and the evils of big government. It’s even worse when they assert some kind of moral superiority over the metropolitan areas that pay their bills. * https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/14/opinion/kentucky-tornado-federal-aid.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/14/opinion/kentucky-tornado-... * https://archive.md/ExBqu https://archive.md/ExBqu The The Hill article linked to also references ALEC (American Legislative Exchange Council), which also is pushing for a non-progressive flat tax: * https://www.alec.org/model-policy/flat-tax-option-act/ https://www.alec.org/model-policy/flat-tax-option-act/ ALEC, while labeled as "non-partisan", certainly has clear leaning (as it's original under §History illustrate): > ALEC has produced model bills on a broad range of issues, such as reducing regulation and individual and corporate taxation, combating illegal immigration, loosening environmental regulations, tightening voter identification rules, weakening labor unions, and opposing gun control.[8][9][10][11] * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Legislative_Exchange_Council https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Legislative_Exchange_...

Acrobatic_Road 5y ago

Not only that, but these statistics that always get cited leave out federal subsidy of state and municipal bonds through tax exemption of interest payments - allowing states to pay less than they would otherwise. And the states with most the most taxpayer supported debt (both state and municipal) tend to be blue states. The explicit purpose of this system is to reduce the debt burden for state and local governments, yet its not considered a subsidy by these stats because the federal government isn't directly giving anyone money.