Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Money is fungible, taxes don't work that way, both of your examples of FL and TX produce more fed tax revenue than they receive, so it's hard to see how you think this would apply.




States can increase their income taxes, which can be deducted against federal income taxes. This keeps the tax revenue internal to the state and avoids sending it to a federal government who would spend the tax revenue suboptimally. These funds can be spent on climate mitigation programs within a state. If your state has no income tax and relies on the federal government, that’s unfortunate (I suppose increasing property and sales tax is an option, if not regressive).

SALT limits have been bumped to $40k from $10k: https://www.nerdwallet.com/article/taxes/salt-tax-deduction

Lots of ways to make this work with policy.


Love this line of thought. Tired of dealing with bible thumpers who can't understand the basic physics of carbon in the atmosphere. All productive states (aka BLUE states) should keep their money and tell the feds to FAFO at this point. We need to protect ourselves, if they want to have their idiotic belief systems that's too bad. "Don't appeal to mercy to God the Father up in the sky, little man, because he's not at home and never was at home, and couldn't care less. What you do with yourself, whether you are happy or unhappy - live or die - is strictly your business and the universe doesn't care."

Not really. They're still going to get the money, but the deficit will be bigger.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: