Fiscal Federalism: No More Federal Funding of Local Government \ stacker news ~Politics_And

pull down to refresh

Fiscal Federalism: No More Federal Funding of Local Government mises.org/mises-wire/fiscal-federalism-no-more-federal-funding-local-government

93 sats \ 8 comments \ @Rothbardian_fanatic 4 Jan Politics_And_Law

At the heart of this history, and potential federal budget cost-cutting efforts, is a concept known as fiscal federalism, which is defined as, “...financial relations between units of governments in a federal government system...[that] is part of broader public finance study within the discipline of economics...fiscal federalism deals with the division of governmental functions and financial relations among levels of government.”

Fiscal federalism, in other words, investigates how local, state, and federal governments should relate among themselves with respect to their policies and financial responsibilities, investigating what and who determine the locus of decision-making and spending authority among different levels of government.

This is also a very nice, low-hanging fruit for DOGE. Local communities can handle this sort of expenditure if they want to do them. Why is it being routed through the sticky-fingered hands of the federal bureaucracy when it can be done directly? Perhaps there is grift and graft available by doing it this way.

view all related items

20 sats \ 7 replies \ @Undisciplined 4 Jan

That would be a big deal. So many of the mechanisms of control are of this kind.

56 sats \ 1 reply \ @SimpleStacker 4 Jan

Yes. The largest source of state revenue is actually grants from the federal government. It's no wonder the federal government has so much control and presidential elections are so bitter. Rein in the federal agencies!

31 sats \ 0 replies \ @Rothbardian_fanatic OP 4 Jan

Not just the federal agencies, also the grants and the money going to the states. Let them decide what is important for them. Let California Californicate and New York burn itself down if that is what those people want. Maybe, not so much money would stick to the hands of the state officials that way, either.

40 sats \ 4 replies \ @Rothbardian_fanatic OP 4 Jan

Right, waste of money and control. I think this is why Trump, Musk and Ramaswamy are going after these things so hard. But, when the states squawk, will they give up and bend the knee or will they be like Milei? I hope the latter.

20 sats \ 3 replies \ @Undisciplined 4 Jan

It's a perverse arrangement, because most people would rather not pay for these things, but since the Feds already stole their money, this is the only way to get it back.

38 sats \ 2 replies \ @Rothbardian_fanatic OP 4 Jan

I agree with that, but I think it is better not stolen in the first place. The federal government is not even the right thief for the situation, is it? The local city and state governments can do their own robbery.

20 sats \ 1 reply \ @Undisciplined 4 Jan

That's why I don't think there will be much pushback from the states/people. They don't want these programs, but they do want their money back.

31 sats \ 0 replies \ @Rothbardian_fanatic OP 4 Jan

Yep, they want their money back because they can dip their beaks into the flow and get what they can. This is what the state is for and what it does. FTS!