6 ms·

> You pay taxes that are not much higher than in the US and actually get things in return This is what bothers me the most about the U.S. Federal Government.

> You pay taxes that are not much higher than in the US and actually get things in return This is what bothers me the most about the U.S. Federal Government. Most of the things I enjoy in the U.S. are provided by my city, county and state. Things like courts and fire protection and cops and roads and schools and water and sewage systems and electricity and parks. And what's amazing about all that is I don't pay very much for it. States and cities seem to be able to really stretch our tax dollars. I pay a lot more into the federal government and in return I get interstates (which are awesome) and the TSA at airports and borders. Other than that, I don't really have many tangible interactions with the federal government at all. This was made very obvious during the shutdown, which I wouldn't have noticed if I hadn't been reading the news. It seems to be largely a money pit.

johnchristopher 12y ago
Bear with me as I don't live in the US but doesn't some money taxed by the federal entity trickle down to the states somehow ? edit: What's the state/federal taxes ratio ?
- nostromo 12y ago
  Yes, but only if you live in a poorer state. Every state I've lived in has been one of the rich states that gives more money to the federal government than it receives in services.
  - privong 12y ago
    But that does not mean that federal taxes do not enhance the state budget. That just means your federal taxes amount to more than the assistance your state gets. So your state budget is still enhanced by federal grants, over what it would have been.
- john_b 12y ago
  To answer your first question: yes. However, the amount varies greatly by state and changes year to year. Many of the programs for which states receive federal money are temporary in nature. Others, like federal subsidies for state Medicaid programs, are more permanent in nature. The actual ratio is going to be very uneven throughout the country.
- malyk 12y ago
  The ratio is different for every state and every tax bracket, but in California, on a married developers salary with a house, we pay something like 17.5% Fed, 9.3% state, and local (property tax) is 1.4376% of the value of your home, which on my salary is something like 5%. So for us, income and property tax add up to almost 32% of our income. Home ownership is the big wildcard in that calculation. You could pay nothing to your locality (other than sales taxes) if you don't own a home and instead pay a higher percentage to the feds.* * - of course, someone owns the home and is paying property taxes, but your personal tax bill doesn't reflect that.
- rdtsc 12y ago
  See a sibling comment. It does work like that. There an interesting power division between fed, state and local. Fed usually use the "carrot" approach to distributing some taxes. So instead of "forcing" states to comply say to set a speed limit. They'll just withhold the funds for road repair and maintenance if speed limit is not set according to some standards. Perhaps the same goes for other things welfare money, drinking age, etc. Some people are fiercely in favour of more state control (almost down to a religious type conviction). I never really got that. I came from Europe and when I think of "government" I think of one government entity. It operates at multiple levels but it is more or the same entity. And basic things like traffic laws, gun laws, sales taxes, etc are uniform.
  - dnautics 12y ago
    Because in theory you have more control over your state and (even more) your local authorities. This is a consequence of simple voting power theory - and extending the notion of 'control' beyond single votes to activism, letter-writing, pamphleteering, etc. (In practice it doesn't work that way because no one seems to care that much about the local authorities, probably because it's more exciting to keep people excited about people in power at higher levels). Europe will come to understand that philosophy as it merges to become the EU. Already the EU is an overcomplicated mess where the dynamics of agency are unclear. It will get worse as the EU claims more power over the member states.
    - seszett 12y ago
      > Europe will come to understand that philosophy as it merges to become the EU I'm not sure that is very likely. France for example is 65 million people, so around 1/5th of the US. That is not a very large difference, and that's twice the size of the largest US state. With anywhere between 1 and 11 million inhabitants, French régions are actually close to US states, yet since 1789, there have been little will to delegate more power to the régions (or the smaller départements). Some people like having a central government that ensures equality between all parts of the territory. On the other hand we might have more little overseas régions that might have a hard time fending for themselves if the central state didn't allocate more money to them without asking the other régions' opinion.
privong 12y ago
But it isn't that simple. State budgets are partly funded by federal taxes. Just skimming this abstract from the CBO report[0], in 2011, 25% of state and local government expenses were covered by federal grants amounting to over half a trillion dollars. [0] https://www.cbo.gov/publication/43967 https://www.cbo.gov/publication/43967
- nostromo 12y ago
  Sure, I'm simplifying, but I think my point stands. Federal tax as percent of GDP: 19% [1] State and local tax as percent of GDP: 9% [2] So, even if we bump up state and local expenditures to 11.25%, it still seems like we're getting a better deal from local governance. 1) http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=205 http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Doc... 2) http://www.ncsl.org/documents/fiscal/TaxesandtheEconomy.pdf http://www.ncsl.org/documents/fiscal/TaxesandtheEconomy.pdf (a little out of date...)
  - vasilipupkin 12y ago
    As explained in other comments, Federal Govt is basically a giant insurance company with an army.
- shit_parade 12y ago
  This is an over simplification as some States pay more in taxes then they get in return via various federal pay outs.
  - privong 12y ago
    Some states get less in payouts than their _residents_ pay in taxes. But the state budgets are still larger with the federal payouts than they would be with only the state taxes.
kohanz 12y ago
Some would argue (not myself, just pointing it out), that every one of your interactions is made in freedom, which is made possible by a very large military spend.
- tankenmate 12y ago
  Except that many other countries have freedom but don't spend anywhere near as much (absolute or per capita) on defence.
  - WildUtah 12y ago
    Foreign countries might or might not have freedom if the US were not subsidizing their security with expensive US military operations around the world. Some say the US screwed up so much under Bush it would have been better to loose the world without American protection, and Bush did do a terrible job. But we don't know either way. In any case, many other countries would pay more for military operations if the US paid less.
  - crusso 12y ago
    The flip side of that is that the USA has heavily subsidized the defenses of Europe and the rest of the world. Not that they've asked for it - but it's difficult to conceive that Europe would have escaped Hitler or the USSR's aggressions without a lot of military spending on their behalf by the USA.
    - scott_karana 12y ago
      Conversely, it's difficult to conceive that the United States would have gained independence over the UK without a lot of military spending on their behalf and direct military actions by the French.
      - panzagl 12y ago
        Well, by the Bourbon monarchy in France.
      - 12y ago
liveoneggs 12y ago
you get war and war and more war!
WildUtah 12y ago
The top programs the Federal Government pays for are Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, and the military. Everything else is in the small single digit percentages. If you're not fighting a war or retired, it's not a surprise that you don't see much direct benefit from federal spending. State operations like schools, streets and roads, airports, transit, and police are much more visible in daily life. Still, state budgets are supplemented with grants from the federal government, too. But the big point here is that retirement and health care and war are the biggest federal operations. And, to reference op, you don't get much benefit of that living overseas. --- Incidentally, the TSA is paid for by air ticket taxes and the interstates were paid for mostly by federal gas taxes and maintained by state taxes. Only new highway construction is paid for out of federal income taxes since the gas tax became unpopular in Congress in the 1990s and was allowed to drop too low to pay for highway grants so it was replaced with income tax money. So even your visible federal tax benefit examples aren't really paid out of federal income tax.
- yequalsx 12y ago
  Social Security and Medicare are not entitlement programs. They are insurance programs that are largely acutuarily sound. They should not be considered government expenditures as they are funded by the users of the insurance programs.
  - humanrebar 12y ago
    They are entitlement programs. Current taxpayers pay for current beneficiaries, and it has been that way since the programs were founded. Who do you think paid for the first recipients of social security?
    - thanksgiving 12y ago
      > Who do you think paid for the first recipients of social security? I didn't know this was the case. Why would they start paying out as soon as they started collecting? It makes no sense to me.
IvyMike 12y ago
The federal government spends mostly on SS, Medicare/Medicaid, and military. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:U.S._Federal_Spending_-_FY_2011.png https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:U.S._Federal_Spending_-_F... Presumably if the fed wasn't paying for social security and medicare/medicaid, your state would have to, or you'd have bands of sick and elderly wandering the streets like so many zombies. If the fed wasn't paying for the military, I guess your state could also do this, lest the Brits march in and put us all under the rule of the king again.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
perlpimp 12y ago
Norway population is 5 million so it makes sense not to have federal/state divided governance like in US.
rawetern 12y ago
Don't forget: Eternal war is expensive.
eloisant 12y ago
You also get an awesome army that kicks asses around the world, isn't that cool? ;)
danudey 12y ago
Don't forget a massive amount of military spending, which trickles down to the local communities in the form of reckless and unnecessary police militarization. Also: FDA, EPA, FCC, FBI, CIA, and tons of other TLD agencies that keep the country running in the long run.

johnchristopher 12y ago

Bear with me as I don't live in the US but doesn't some money taxed by the federal entity trickle down to the states somehow ? edit: What's the state/federal taxes ratio ?

nostromo 12y ago
Yes, but only if you live in a poorer state. Every state I've lived in has been one of the rich states that gives more money to the federal government than it receives in services.
- privong 12y ago
  But that does not mean that federal taxes do not enhance the state budget. That just means your federal taxes amount to more than the assistance your state gets. So your state budget is still enhanced by federal grants, over what it would have been.
john_b 12y ago
To answer your first question: yes. However, the amount varies greatly by state and changes year to year. Many of the programs for which states receive federal money are temporary in nature. Others, like federal subsidies for state Medicaid programs, are more permanent in nature. The actual ratio is going to be very uneven throughout the country.
malyk 12y ago
The ratio is different for every state and every tax bracket, but in California, on a married developers salary with a house, we pay something like 17.5% Fed, 9.3% state, and local (property tax) is 1.4376% of the value of your home, which on my salary is something like 5%. So for us, income and property tax add up to almost 32% of our income. Home ownership is the big wildcard in that calculation. You could pay nothing to your locality (other than sales taxes) if you don't own a home and instead pay a higher percentage to the feds.* * - of course, someone owns the home and is paying property taxes, but your personal tax bill doesn't reflect that.
rdtsc 12y ago
See a sibling comment. It does work like that. There an interesting power division between fed, state and local. Fed usually use the "carrot" approach to distributing some taxes. So instead of "forcing" states to comply say to set a speed limit. They'll just withhold the funds for road repair and maintenance if speed limit is not set according to some standards. Perhaps the same goes for other things welfare money, drinking age, etc. Some people are fiercely in favour of more state control (almost down to a religious type conviction). I never really got that. I came from Europe and when I think of "government" I think of one government entity. It operates at multiple levels but it is more or the same entity. And basic things like traffic laws, gun laws, sales taxes, etc are uniform.
- dnautics 12y ago
  Because in theory you have more control over your state and (even more) your local authorities. This is a consequence of simple voting power theory - and extending the notion of 'control' beyond single votes to activism, letter-writing, pamphleteering, etc. (In practice it doesn't work that way because no one seems to care that much about the local authorities, probably because it's more exciting to keep people excited about people in power at higher levels). Europe will come to understand that philosophy as it merges to become the EU. Already the EU is an overcomplicated mess where the dynamics of agency are unclear. It will get worse as the EU claims more power over the member states.
  - seszett 12y ago
    > Europe will come to understand that philosophy as it merges to become the EU I'm not sure that is very likely. France for example is 65 million people, so around 1/5th of the US. That is not a very large difference, and that's twice the size of the largest US state. With anywhere between 1 and 11 million inhabitants, French régions are actually close to US states, yet since 1789, there have been little will to delegate more power to the régions (or the smaller départements). Some people like having a central government that ensures equality between all parts of the territory. On the other hand we might have more little overseas régions that might have a hard time fending for themselves if the central state didn't allocate more money to them without asking the other régions' opinion.

privong 12y ago

But it isn't that simple. State budgets are partly funded by federal taxes. Just skimming this abstract from the CBO report[0], in 2011, 25% of state and local government expenses were covered by federal grants amounting to over half a trillion dollars. [0] https://www.cbo.gov/publication/43967 https://www.cbo.gov/publication/43967

nostromo 12y ago
Sure, I'm simplifying, but I think my point stands. Federal tax as percent of GDP: 19% [1] State and local tax as percent of GDP: 9% [2] So, even if we bump up state and local expenditures to 11.25%, it still seems like we're getting a better deal from local governance. 1) http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=205 http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Doc... 2) http://www.ncsl.org/documents/fiscal/TaxesandtheEconomy.pdf http://www.ncsl.org/documents/fiscal/TaxesandtheEconomy.pdf (a little out of date...)
- vasilipupkin 12y ago
  As explained in other comments, Federal Govt is basically a giant insurance company with an army.
shit_parade 12y ago
This is an over simplification as some States pay more in taxes then they get in return via various federal pay outs.
- privong 12y ago
  Some states get less in payouts than their _residents_ pay in taxes. But the state budgets are still larger with the federal payouts than they would be with only the state taxes.

kohanz 12y ago

Some would argue (not myself, just pointing it out), that every one of your interactions is made in freedom, which is made possible by a very large military spend.

tankenmate 12y ago
Except that many other countries have freedom but don't spend anywhere near as much (absolute or per capita) on defence.
- WildUtah 12y ago
  Foreign countries might or might not have freedom if the US were not subsidizing their security with expensive US military operations around the world. Some say the US screwed up so much under Bush it would have been better to loose the world without American protection, and Bush did do a terrible job. But we don't know either way. In any case, many other countries would pay more for military operations if the US paid less.
- crusso 12y ago
  The flip side of that is that the USA has heavily subsidized the defenses of Europe and the rest of the world. Not that they've asked for it - but it's difficult to conceive that Europe would have escaped Hitler or the USSR's aggressions without a lot of military spending on their behalf by the USA.
  - scott_karana 12y ago
    Conversely, it's difficult to conceive that the United States would have gained independence over the UK without a lot of military spending on their behalf and direct military actions by the French.
    - panzagl 12y ago
      Well, by the Bourbon monarchy in France.
    - 12y ago

liveoneggs 12y ago

you get war and war and more war!

WildUtah 12y ago

The top programs the Federal Government pays for are Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, and the military. Everything else is in the small single digit percentages. If you're not fighting a war or retired, it's not a surprise that you don't see much direct benefit from federal spending. State operations like schools, streets and roads, airports, transit, and police are much more visible in daily life. Still, state budgets are supplemented with grants from the federal government, too. But the big point here is that retirement and health care and war are the biggest federal operations. And, to reference op, you don't get much benefit of that living overseas. --- Incidentally, the TSA is paid for by air ticket taxes and the interstates were paid for mostly by federal gas taxes and maintained by state taxes. Only new highway construction is paid for out of federal income taxes since the gas tax became unpopular in Congress in the 1990s and was allowed to drop too low to pay for highway grants so it was replaced with income tax money. So even your visible federal tax benefit examples aren't really paid out of federal income tax.

yequalsx 12y ago
Social Security and Medicare are not entitlement programs. They are insurance programs that are largely acutuarily sound. They should not be considered government expenditures as they are funded by the users of the insurance programs.
- humanrebar 12y ago
  They are entitlement programs. Current taxpayers pay for current beneficiaries, and it has been that way since the programs were founded. Who do you think paid for the first recipients of social security?
  - thanksgiving 12y ago
    > Who do you think paid for the first recipients of social security? I didn't know this was the case. Why would they start paying out as soon as they started collecting? It makes no sense to me.

IvyMike 12y ago

The federal government spends mostly on SS, Medicare/Medicaid, and military. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:U.S._Federal_Spending_-_FY_2011.png https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:U.S._Federal_Spending_-_F... Presumably if the fed wasn't paying for social security and medicare/medicaid, your state would have to, or you'd have bands of sick and elderly wandering the streets like so many zombies. If the fed wasn't paying for the military, I guess your state could also do this, lest the Brits march in and put us all under the rule of the king again.

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

perlpimp 12y ago

Norway population is 5 million so it makes sense not to have federal/state divided governance like in US.

rawetern 12y ago

Don't forget: Eternal war is expensive.

eloisant 12y ago

You also get an awesome army that kicks asses around the world, isn't that cool? ;)

danudey 12y ago

Don't forget a massive amount of military spending, which trickles down to the local communities in the form of reckless and unnecessary police militarization. Also: FDA, EPA, FCC, FBI, CIA, and tons of other TLD agencies that keep the country running in the long run.