> Because California’s economy is forcibly diverted to subsidize Alabama's political decisions (given the way federal funding formulas work, largely specificall

> Because California’s economy is forcibly diverted to subsidize Alabama's political decisions (given the way federal funding formulas work, largely specifically because those decisions are consistent failures in aggregate economic terms.) I agree. I think that the way the US does things is kind of ridiculous. > Also, because being conmpelled to tolerate denials of fundamental human rights is an intolerable condition. How do you feel about the US not managing it's own petroleum production at levels to support its own use, effectively requiring propping up the Saudi regime? I think we can safely say they have a worse track record on women's rights than Alabama. Do you feel that's intolerable as well?