3 ms·

What makes the GP statement untrue? I can imagine that cash flows between the US and states are dissimilar from those between nations that originate from trade

What makes the GP statement untrue? I can imagine that cash flows between the US and states are dissimilar from those between nations that originate from trade - is this your qualm?

pirate787 4y ago
These "donor" state analyses are dishonest because they use % of state budget that's from the federal government as a key metric. This metric unfairly penalizes states that run lean governments. Further, most of this federal money is entitlement spending that's following poor citizens, like the impoverished people of the Mississippi Delta, and would accrue to them no matter what state they lived in.
- mikeyouse 4y ago
  Imagine describing states at the bottom of education and public health standards with horrible racial disparities as running “lean” governments.
  - dsfyu404ed 4y ago
    Are they still at the bottom of the education and health standards after adjusting for income? Hint: I wouldn't be asking this question if I didn't know the answer. It's long since been established that pouring money at heatlhcare and education does not do much for improving outcomes. You need to somehow cultivate a culture of less dysfunction and money can't do that by itself. It take a sociopathical kind of dishonesty to sit there and tell us with a straight face that these states would be better if they just paid more taxes and ran higher touch governments. Even in states that want to run that way the ROI of each subsequent dollar is not great and a lot of these poorer states couldn't afford to run their states that way. It would be great if states like West Virginia could run expansive public healthcare programs like states like Massachusetts do but the money just isn't there and desire to run such a program and run it well isn't there either.
- gghhzzgghhzz 4y ago
  it's dishonest, because it doesn't take account of the massive amounts of wealth going in the opposite direction. People's daily lives have been financialised to an extent that there is always a transfer of wealth in the opposite direction
- int_19h 4y ago
  In other states, those same people might not be so impoverished that they require the same amount of federal money to subsist. Perhaps running a "lean government" might have something to do with that?

What makes the GP statement untrue? I can imagine that cash flows between the US and states are dissimilar from those between nations that originate from trade - is this your qualm?

pirate787 4y ago

These "donor" state analyses are dishonest because they use % of state budget that's from the federal government as a key metric. This metric unfairly penalizes states that run lean governments. Further, most of this federal money is entitlement spending that's following poor citizens, like the impoverished people of the Mississippi Delta, and would accrue to them no matter what state they lived in.

mikeyouse 4y ago
Imagine describing states at the bottom of education and public health standards with horrible racial disparities as running “lean” governments.
- dsfyu404ed 4y ago
  Are they still at the bottom of the education and health standards after adjusting for income? Hint: I wouldn't be asking this question if I didn't know the answer. It's long since been established that pouring money at heatlhcare and education does not do much for improving outcomes. You need to somehow cultivate a culture of less dysfunction and money can't do that by itself. It take a sociopathical kind of dishonesty to sit there and tell us with a straight face that these states would be better if they just paid more taxes and ran higher touch governments. Even in states that want to run that way the ROI of each subsequent dollar is not great and a lot of these poorer states couldn't afford to run their states that way. It would be great if states like West Virginia could run expansive public healthcare programs like states like Massachusetts do but the money just isn't there and desire to run such a program and run it well isn't there either.
gghhzzgghhzz 4y ago
it's dishonest, because it doesn't take account of the massive amounts of wealth going in the opposite direction. People's daily lives have been financialised to an extent that there is always a transfer of wealth in the opposite direction
int_19h 4y ago
In other states, those same people might not be so impoverished that they require the same amount of federal money to subsist. Perhaps running a "lean government" might have something to do with that?