Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Well you touched on it then. Your first link, first page shows this:
So this "disparity" between states is not about outright direct federal payments to state govt, institutions or individuals, but is calculated but the lions share of it is funding military bases, national institutions such as labs, the huge swaths of federal land the govt keeps, etc.....
Not just "welfare" as is so often implied.
And on top of it, you still get your benefit of protection from those military installations, the science that comes out of those labs, you can go visit that protected govt land like anybody else, etc.....
Our fed govt is a big costly beast, and the footprint it requires needs to go somewhere...
You should lobby for a huge military installation in New Jersey!
I would love one closer to me in northern Arizona. Meanwhile I'll pay my $2000 per year property taxes as I have done, and never ask you to subsidize me in my local taxes, since those will have no way of ever benefiting you up in New Jersey. Dont ask me to subsidize yours.
We have 7 military bases in NJ, but I guess we are just that much more productive than a lot of other states, because even with the federal money they bring in, we still have to fund the lazy, unproductive, welfare states at a rate of 2 to 1. I guess without he military bases, it might be more like 3 to 1. And you think YOU are being cheated? LOL.
I can't help but giggle at the laughable following post that attempts to contradict what the NYT themselves have admitted.
raising the SALT cap to help those below the top 10% of earners may very well make sense. But there can be no serious claim that "SALT by and large benefits the middle class"
Simple math tells you there are WAY MORE middle class than there are top 1%.
Statistics tell you a family making $192k is still middle class in the coastal cities.
These families who are bringing in $100k-$192k and are living in a house that is worth 7-figure are the middle class of the coastal cities. They are also the ones benefiting from SALT.
When I say the middle class, I am using the standard of the liberal cities, not some hick rural town.
You think writing it off my federal taxes makes it "no big deal"? It's still a big deal forking over 6 figures in SALT taxes every year. But the concept of paying federal tax on money that I don't get to keep for myself is abhorrent to any true conservative, in my opinion. I thought we were the party that was against governmental theft. Maybe not?
forking over 6 figures in SALT taxes every year.
My heart is bleeding for you Mr. Oppressed Working Class. Times be hard.
New Jersey? I would have voted with my feet a looooong time ago.
We have 7 military bases in NJ, but I guess we are just that much more productive than a lot of other states, because even with the federal money they bring in, we still have to fund the lazy, unproductive, welfare states at a rate of 2 to 1. I guess without he military bases, it might be more like 3 to 1. And you think YOU are being cheated? LOL.
Guess you need to lobby for even more fed presence in your state. Sure seems like you could afford little time off to go lobby.
Maybe they could move the Kennedy Center near you. That sure seems to get showered with fed money every time a liberal hiccups.
Military bases are jobs programs to states. Federal spending in state is a sizable multiplier.
They are at that.
But these lefties (and the entitled but "oppressed" wealthy) act as if red states with military bases are welfare recipients. The bases have to go somewhere, so clearly lefties need to lobby to get them put in their own state.
The output and function of the fed installations tend serve all states.
Subsidizing SaLT with federal money only benefits the local (mostly wealthy) areas.
But these lefties (and the entitled but "oppressed" wealthy) act as if red states with military bases are welfare recipients. The bases have to go somewhere, so clearly lefties need to lobby to get them put in their own state.
The output and function of the fed installations tend serve all states.
Subsidizing SaLT with federal money only benefits the local (mostly wealthy) areas.
There are two problems, right? Overtaxing SALT states and underallocating to SALT states. You can fix the former through the latter, but the higher cost states tend to be more densely populated, but they don't get any incremental say in the senate. Every state lobbies for more federal dollars, but there are structural reasons some states are always fed and others are not.
So high cost of living states have to fund state budgets/services, that are inflated in cost relative to the rest of country on average, with whatever is left after the federal government takes it cut to give away to the less inflated parts of the country. Fed takes the inflated dollars, gives it away, and tells the state to kick rocks. SALT was an easy, auto-adjustor to federal taxes for local/state inflation.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
