3 ms·

I think a more honest take was it leveled the playing field by removing a loophole. I think it's hard to argue that the deduction was anything more than panderi

• mattnewton 4y ago
  It always made sense to me as a subsidy to states and local municipalities, who would otherwise might rely on a much more inefficient process of asking for federal funds to make obligations to their citizens like schools and infrastructure a reality. The rich people can (and often do) move for tax reasons, so I don’t see it as a handout to them. I do see it as a subsidy to states who want to run more of their own infrastructure and function as the “laboratories of democracy”