CDZ Blue Staters, Reclaim Your Sovereignty

Discussion in 'Clean Debate Zone' started by MPS777, Dec 17, 2017.

  1. MPS777
    Offline

    MPS777 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2017
    Messages:
    122
    Thanks Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    56
    Ratings:
    +58
    I just read an article which pretty much confirmed my suspicion about the new tax bill. It’s largely designed to punish “blue staters” and their voters. In the article, conservative economist Stephen Moore describes it as “death to Democrats”
    Top Trump adviser says the GOP tax bill is 'death to Democrats'

    Here’s the gist of what’s going on, again, straight from conservative Steven Moore:
    “Blue staters tend to send liberal politicians to office, who then vote for bigger federal spending — even though a greater share of the money goes to the red states. Maybe somebody needs to write a book called: 'What's the Matter With Massachusetts.’
    This is of course a riff on the old ‘What's the Matter with Kansas?’ thing.

    And it’s true. The conservative ‘Tax Foundation’ used to collect raw data on how much states were paying into the federal government, versus how much they were getting out. They probably stopped because it was embarrassing:
    https://files.taxfoundation.org/legacy/docs/fedspend_per_taxesbystate-20071009.pdf

    So here’s the deal as I see it. Blue staters, republicans think you’re chumps, and thus don’t respect you. They will use the big federal welfare programs to hold you over the barrel. But don’t you realize? Hardly any of those federal welfare programs really need to be federal. Repeal programs like medicare and obamacare, and replace them with your own programs. Just don’t forget to put in place legislative roadblocks to out-of-staters coming in and draining them.

    Something I agree with liberals on is that government intervention in healthcare is necessary. Every modern nation on this planet uses some combination of regulations and subsidies to make sure their healthcare systems work for everyone. If American conservatives don’t see that, then fine, make it their own problem. Cut the taxing/spending at the federal level like they want, and use the funding windfall to help your own. Sometimes you just have to do for you and yours. Embracing modern federalism will help you do that without getting screwed by people that hate you.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  2. william the wie
    Offline

    william the wie Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2009
    Messages:
    13,381
    Thanks Received:
    1,648
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Ratings:
    +6,181
    Even as separate nations there will be tax flight as with the many Brits, Canucks, Kiwis, Aussies and others who come to the US. The red states are willing to pay for defense, the left is not. And this list can go on forever: the Red states are willing to go to the mat, the blue states are not.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  3. jwoodie
    Offline

    jwoodie Gold Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2012
    Messages:
    11,056
    Thanks Received:
    1,686
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Ratings:
    +6,250
    So you think the federal government should subsidize state and local taxes?
     
  4. jwoodie
    Offline

    jwoodie Gold Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2012
    Messages:
    11,056
    Thanks Received:
    1,686
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Ratings:
    +6,250
    The Blue State "tax imbalance" is a load of BS, pretending that expenditures for national defense do not benefit them and ignoring federal payments (e.g., Social Security) that are made directly to their residents.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  5. MPS777
    Offline

    MPS777 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2017
    Messages:
    122
    Thanks Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    56
    Ratings:
    +58
    Nope, in fact I believe in a flat/fair tax at the federal level. But I think that would have to go hand in hand with the repeal of many of the federal social welfare programs. What I think should be done is that a constitutional amendment should be passed which guarantees federal funding backing to all Americans who literally can’t afford healthcare. This could be funded with a national sales tax. Then I’d repeal social security and medicare along with the federal payroll taxes, and refund people for what they’ve paid in. Obamacare would go too. I’d try to remove all distortions from the federal tax code (especially the corporate health insurance tax deduction). Then at my own state level I’d advocate for a public option healthcare plan. It would be guarantee issue, and have a deductible that shrinks with income. And there would qualification restrictions on it that would prevent out-of-staters from jumping in just to take advantage of the guaranteed-issue.

    I think there’s a strong case to be made that federal social welfare spending is unconstitutional anyway:
    The General Welfare Clause is not about writing checks

    I consider myself a centrist “federalist”.
     
  6. jwoodie
    Offline

    jwoodie Gold Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2012
    Messages:
    11,056
    Thanks Received:
    1,686
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Ratings:
    +6,250
    If federal social welfare spending is not constitutional, then federal health care spending is even less so. Why are you opposed to removing federal impediments to competitive health care systems (e.g., insurance across state lines) and letting the states take care of this issue?
     
  7. MPS777
    Offline

    MPS777 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2017
    Messages:
    122
    Thanks Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    56
    Ratings:
    +58
    That’s the second post now that you’ve tried creating a straw man to argue with. I hope it doesn’t become a pattern. The federal government has broad powers under the Commerce Clause. A repeal of the McCarran - Ferguson Act would probably be deemed constitutional.
    McCarran–Ferguson Act - Wikipedia
    It wouldn’t bother me much. The American Academy of Actuaries are skeptical that “health insurance across state lines” would make much of a difference:
    Selling Insurance Across State Lines

    So yeah, go ahead and sell across state lines.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  8. PredFan
    Offline

    PredFan Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2011
    Messages:
    38,666
    Thanks Received:
    5,681
    Trophy Points:
    1,170
    Location:
    In Liberal minds, rent free.
    Ratings:
    +21,166
    Why don’t those rich 1%ers in blue states want to pay their fair share?
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  9. jillian
    Offline

    jillian Princess Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2006
    Messages:
    82,494
    Thanks Received:
    14,763
    Trophy Points:
    2,220
    Location:
    The Other Side of Paradise
    Ratings:
    +32,617
    Texas v. White | law case

    :cuckoo:
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  10. william the wie
    Offline

    william the wie Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2009
    Messages:
    13,381
    Thanks Received:
    1,648
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Ratings:
    +6,181
    A more saleable position might be a WTO compliant uniform percentage tariff with a very short list of exemptions.
     

Share This Page