Under Trump, red states are going to be able to turn themselves into poor, unhealthy paradises.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

In 2004, the journalist and historian Thomas Frank wrote an insightful and prescient book, “What’s the Matter With Kansas?", in which he tried to puzzle out why voters in his native state backed Republicans whose policies undermined their own economic interests.

Watching the apocalyptic response to Donald Trump's victory in the liberal precincts I inhabit, I’m struck by a similar quandary: Why are voters in states that pay a disproportionately large share of federal taxes, and benefit from a disproportionately small share of federal spending, so upset about the prospect of a cut in taxes and federal spending?

Data compiled by the Pew Charitable Trust found that 10 states that receive less than a dollar back for every dollar they send to Washington: Delaware, Minnesota, Nebraska, New Jersey, Connecticut, Illinois, Ohio, Massachusetts, New York and Rhode Island. And here are the states that get more than $2 back for every $1 in taxes paid: Mississippi, New Mexico, West Virginia, Hawaii, South Carolina, Alabama, Maine, Montana, Alaska, Virginia, Arizona, Idaho, Kentucky and Vermont. You don’t have to be a political scientist to see the blue state/red state pattern here. Red state voters may talk a good game about small government and low taxes, but in reality they are socialist moochers.

Rather than wallowing in the hypocrisy of all this, however, Democrats should see the opportunity here — an opportunity to turn the Republican program to their selfish advantage and create the kind of society where people look out for each other and business interests are not allowed to run roughshod over workers and consumers.

After all, if Republicans cut taxes — in particular, taxes on investment income — then the biggest winners are going to be the residents of Democratic states where incomes, and thus income taxes, are significantly higher. Governors and legislatures in those states — home to roughly half of all Americans — will now have the financial headroom to raise state income and business taxes by as much as the federal government cuts them — and use the additional revenue to replace all the federal services and benefits that Republicans have vowed to cut.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/12/04/democrats-can-look-forward-to-the-coming-republican-era-being-a-disaster-for-republican-voters/?tid=hybrid_experimentrandom_3_na&utm_term=.e46aecdbc19d

[RKP5637]

1. I've always thought there is a masochistic element in the US that wants to be punished all

of the time. I do not know if it's because some see themselves as sinners needing to be punished or what. I know hate radio and the like feeds it, but beyond that, I think there are mechanisms at work.

[enough]

2. Well, if that's what they want, perhaps they should be allowed to

live out their intention.

[loyalsister]

3. MO already has

Didn't expand Medicaid. One of the highest infant mortality rates and 2nd most hungry state. Also 2nd in toddler shootings.

[Different Drummer]

4. Just what they've always wanted. n/t

[Warpy]

5. NM is a little different from the rest

because we've got 2 huge national labs here that account for much of the funding plus multiple Indian reservations that account for the rest. Other than that, it's a low population desert state with generally low wages. They want us to pay more in taxes, they're going to have to raise our pay enough to afford it.

ETA: Oh, yeah, and the state is a strong blue.

[NRQ891]

6. there's a danger is setting super low expectations

Presidents don't have complete control over an economy - they can have bad luck, but they can also have good luck too. Plus, there is a lag between actions and results - much of a president's first term, is experiencing some leftover from the last administration. Jimmy Carter's term is a perfect example of this - a decent president experiencing a trifecta of hangover from the past, before his presidency. Improvement of conditions under Reagan were in part due to a bear market that began in February 1966 finally exhausting itself

The point is this - if everyone talks about how they know life under Trump is going to be a complete disaster, giving perfect karma and payback to the fools who voted him in......and then, even for reasons that have nothing to do with Trump, times are ok or even better? It becomes extremely easy to make him look good, and get re-elected

[Tikki]

8. boosh-w rifled through a good economy quickly...let's see if twitler can drain the kitty faster.

Tikki

[treestar]

7. I like it, though a couple of the states are on the wrong side

of the line, like NM.