In his column this morning, Paul Krugman discusses a recent Times article that shows that the reddest states receive more of their personal income from government programs than blue states. An implication of this is that places such as California would be better off fiscally by seceding from the union (my colleague Lisa Schweitzer shows that California gets less than its fair share of the gasoline tax as well).
So as someone who lives in California (and who plans to remain here until I no longer have any say about where I live), I should support secession, or at minimum, a substantial reduction in federal taxes and spending, which could then be replaced with state taxes and spending. But I care about the elderly and the poor in Oklahoma, so I guess I am stuck; yet the average voter in Oklahoma seems not to care at all about the elderly and poor in California. This leaves us stuck again.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Do you care any less about the poor in Oklahoma than the poor in California? What about the poor in Mexico? Or India? If caring is negatively correlated with distance and/or positively with cultural affinity, then you might support secession. Otherwise you might support world government.
Post a Comment