I feel like that would become a self fulfilling prophecy very quickly, and result in America constantly punching down on the poorest states (instead of just the poorest people, like they do now)
I doubt that, instead it would be about the reps in those states working to actually lift the lives of their people up, instead of shitting all over them for ridiculous ideological reasons.
Honestly I’d prefer that at this point. I’d like to be punching Alabama and Florida for failing their own people.
Stupid should be painful.
Why are we okay with this system where we allow the red states to shoot their citizens in the foot constantly and then expect the blue states to keep sending them all kinds of aid?
Let’s say everybody in a state is equally culpable for electing shit leaders for the sake of the hypothetical: this would be fine at first, but what happens if Florida gets their shit together in 30 years and makes a unified push for a good leader and real quality of life improvements for the people? (please suspend your disbelief lmao). All their votes together would mean nothing because of the shit QoL 30 years of republicans would get them, and they’d be powerless to enact any positive change unless the states doing the best under the new system decided to allow it. That’s what I mean by self fulfilling prophecy; poor states can only get poorer and rich ones get richer.
I think you’re confusing state government with federal government.
The state governments can still enact their own state laws all they want. The high QoL states would still be voting for increased QoL at a federal level. Which would rise the tide even for the dipshits.
I just don’t have any faith in the kind of good state laws could do if the state is already at rock bottom. Seems like it’d require federal intervention (that would be against the interests of all the rich states) imo, tho I can’t pretend to know where Americans like to draw the line for when federal aid is okay lol.
I feel like that would become a self fulfilling prophecy very quickly, and result in America constantly punching down on the poorest states (instead of just the poorest people, like they do now)
I doubt that, instead it would be about the reps in those states working to actually lift the lives of their people up, instead of shitting all over them for ridiculous ideological reasons.
Honestly I’d prefer that at this point. I’d like to be punching Alabama and Florida for failing their own people.
Stupid should be painful.
Why are we okay with this system where we allow the red states to shoot their citizens in the foot constantly and then expect the blue states to keep sending them all kinds of aid?
Let’s say everybody in a state is equally culpable for electing shit leaders for the sake of the hypothetical: this would be fine at first, but what happens if Florida gets their shit together in 30 years and makes a unified push for a good leader and real quality of life improvements for the people? (please suspend your disbelief lmao). All their votes together would mean nothing because of the shit QoL 30 years of republicans would get them, and they’d be powerless to enact any positive change unless the states doing the best under the new system decided to allow it. That’s what I mean by self fulfilling prophecy; poor states can only get poorer and rich ones get richer.
I think you’re confusing state government with federal government.
The state governments can still enact their own state laws all they want. The high QoL states would still be voting for increased QoL at a federal level. Which would rise the tide even for the dipshits.
I just don’t have any faith in the kind of good state laws could do if the state is already at rock bottom. Seems like it’d require federal intervention (that would be against the interests of all the rich states) imo, tho I can’t pretend to know where Americans like to draw the line for when federal aid is okay lol.