3 ms·
I know nothing about Jackson, but municipalities all around the country are reliant on money flowing federal>state>local, urban>rural, etc. There can be good
by germinalphrase 4y ago
I know nothing about Jackson, but municipalities all around the country are reliant on money flowing federal>state>local, urban>rural, etc.
There can be good reasons to subsidize infrastructure - for example, urban residents help maintain a rural farming community because they desire the agricultural products.
It’s not even clear the entire state of Mississippi is “capable of taking care of themselves” as over 40 percent of their general operating revenue is supplied by the federal government (2017 numbers) which is consistently in the top five states for receiving federal aid.
I’m not an expert, but the defensiveness seems unwarranted.
- ars 4y agoAnd California is 30%, that's a difference obviously, but not such a big difference that you have to say they are unable to take care of themselves. Water supply is a local thing, and local leaders need to take responsibility, not blame the state.
- germinalphrase 4y agoFair enough. I live in neither Mississippi or California, but we really should be talking about Balance of Payments though as federal expenditures by state is only half of it. When you consider federal expenditures vs receipts, we find that California is a net per capita contributor (-$301) while Mississippi is a net per capita receiver (+$7938). https://rockinst.org/issue-areas/fiscal-analysis/balance-of-payments-portal/ https://rockinst.org/issue-areas/fiscal-analysis/balance-of-...