Spyke
sh.itjust.works

Those probably blue, and therefore likely contributor, states should just keep the money they send the federal government instead of receiving a small portion of it back.

From 2018 to 2022, individuals and organizations from blue states contributed nearly 60% of all federal tax receipts but only received 53% of all federal contributions to states in the form of either direct payments, grants, contracts, or wages. Meanwhile, red states were only responsible for 40% of federal tax receipts but received 47% of all federal contributions to states. A 7% differential that in effect equates to a more than $1 trillion transfer payment from blue states to red states, amounting to $4,300 per capita, compared to the instance where their respective fair shares were paid.

https://www.congress.gov/119/meeting/house/118494/documents/HHRG-119-JU13-20250715-SD014-U14.pdf

3

I know everyone always points out that the state doesn't control our taxes going to the federal government. But the bottom line is that needs to change if this behavior continues.

1
sh.itjust.works

In a functional version of America, Congress has the “power of the purse” and controls funding for federal programs, even departments of the executive branch, like DHS.

In a functional version of America, making a threat like this would result in instant impeachment and removal.

In a functional version of America, the chief executive would have the grade school level knowledge of civics which includes the fact that the states control all election procedures for their residents. And then the states provide the results of said elections to the federal government. The federal government plays no role in those elections (except maybe in DC?) outside the scope of the federal election commission (which is an independent agency.)

But alas, we are not living in a functional version of America.

9

we are not living in a functional version of America.

And, as far as I can tell, we may not for the remainder of our lives.

The true threat of a pedophile fascist like Trump is that he's made it abundantly clear what lines can be crossed without repercussion for the shitstains that come after him.

Pandora's Box has been opened.

1

Friendly reminder that California (a common enemy of MAGA) brings in more federal dollars than they spend.

In contrast, most red states are economic mooches.

Maybe we only let states with a net positive income vote at all?

(Not actually suggesting this, but it feels like all ideas are on the table recently. I guess we should go by the numbers).

8
aussie.zone

There’s a really good quote from some ancient greek philosopher that basically says the state can only exist as a political entity for as long as it provides something that its citizens consider a fair trade for taxes. once that fair trade vanishes, the state will collapse.

Does it feel like that now?

21

Trade offer!

The state gets 40% of my income.

And in return

I get to be complict in a cruise-missile double tap on a girl's elementary school.

8
cmbabulreply
slrpnk.net

California or Washington or fuck it Texas should declare secession the day before the 250th and stain the whole thing. Would be really funny

9
HawtP0tat0reply
sh.itjust.works

Illinois (Not Chicago) is already attempting to perform secession so they can be a new state separate from the rest of Illinois (Chicago). Maybe the rest of Illinois (Chicago) could let Illinois (not Chicago) go as a peace offering while also leaving the union? Possibly join Canada like the other poster offered.

6
piefed.social

Then those states whom of which are less likely to bend to the will of this pedophile orangutan, whom of which basically subsidizes the economy and social services for red states, should not pay federal taxes due to the lack of monies and services they wouldn't receive from the baboon federal government.

37
gruereply
lemmy.world

It's not that simple. The tax money doesn't flow through the state; it is paid directly from companies and individuals to the Federal government. The state would have to figure out a mechanism to disrupt that process, and it would end up being a Constitutional crisis (not that we shouldn't have had several in the last few years already...).

15

The state would have to figure out a mechanism to disrupt that process

We're reaching the point where that simply needs to happen.

We are being taken advantage of in this mutual agreement. It's time to update the terms of the agreement or end it.

We hold the cards (money) and it's time to use that to our advantage.

1
lemmy.world

I'm tired of hearing it's not that simple. No. It is. It's not easy, but it is quite simple.

States should do it. When the legal challenges come, good. It doesn't fucking matter if it sticks or not.

Maybe it'll slow them down. Maybe we just need to flood the zone like they do with nonstop, ridiculous, clearly illegal BULLSHIT.

We shouldn't take action because it would invoke a constitutional crisis while recognizing we already have had them (and should have had MORE)?

They're LITERALLY interfering with the machinery of our democracy, and we don't even have enough fucking conviction to TRY FUCKING WITH TAX REVENUE to stop them because 'it's not that simple.'

They TRAFFICK AND RAPE CHILDREN but let's make sure we only do things we know will absolutely work. The kids can wait.

19
gruereply
lemmy.world

I didn't say it shouldn't be done. Just that it's logistically and politically complicated.

7

Create a free automated tax service run by the state, that operates as a pass-through for all taxes, including those eventually flowing to the fed. Stop passing fed portions through and crack down on banks that facilitate the IRS seeking redress directly from tax payers rather than the state public tax service entity.

2
piefed.ca

Canada should offer to let states de-funded by trump to become the 11th, 12th 13th provinces and so on.

12
lemmy.world

Fuck that. Americans showed their true selves here, and Canada wants nothing to do with them anymore.

3

You have nothing but gain. The only Americans that will ever join Canada would be the ones that disagree with the face America currently wears.

1

No, we’re good with Canada. We already have a lot more in common than with the flyover states

1

You reached the end