From the New York Times.
Topping the list of net beneficiaries was, yes, Kentucky, where residents received an average of $14,000 more from Washington than they paid in taxes. To put this in perspective, Kentucky’s 2019 net inflow of federal funds — $63 billion — was roughly 30 percent of the state’s G.D.P. that year.
The states in earth tones pay more in federal taxes than they receive in federal spending. The states in blue receive more in federal spending than they pay in federal taxes. The states in gray, roughly speaking, break even.
The states that are subsidizing the rest of the United States tend to be states that are experiencing net outmigration. States that are experiencing net in migration, in contrast, are predominantly states that the federal government is subsidizing.
While it is certainly not a total explanation, it is very plausible that this simple question of net federal fiscal impact is an important driver of internal migration in the United States.
2 comments:
Reasonable, but with a lot of exceptions. Illinois, for example as a pop donor state, and TX as a pop recipient, both similar in shade.
NY and Cali have long been relatively wealthy due to location/ports and have paid high fed taxes for a long time. Why now suddenly losing pop?
Also, Kentucky and Virginia are the biggest recipients of fed dollars, but are not on the top-ten list of incoming migrants.
Post a Comment