The business cycle hits states at different times, to different degrees. Their experiences also differ from one recession to the next. For instance, West Virginia, generally a low-income state, had a horrible time in the 80s. Presently they are below the national average unemployment rate. I'm not saying they are flush, only that in relative terms they are doing better than other places like Michigan or Rhode Island. Coming into the present downturn, state govs had a general fund surplus of about 10 percent, ON AVERAGE. Naturally some states were doing fine, others like California are in the soup. CA by the way would not be in nearly such bad shape but for their idiotic fiscal rules, stemming from their idiotic initiative-and-referendum, stemming from their idiotic "center-left" electorate. (The idiotic electorate in my own super-liberal, high-income county recently approved a tax limitation law.)
On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 11:31 AM, Julio Huato <[email protected]> wrote: > Max wrote: > >> nothing about the inclination of state and local governments to save or >> use the money [from] tax cuts. So the Zandi estimates are not apples- >> to-apples. > > You're the expert, Max. Why wouldn't state and local govs have low > marginal propensities to save? > >> This would also be a great time for a unified universal child tax credit, >> all of which I would daresay, would be spent. > > Mine is already spent. In my household's spending planning, we've > been discounting a triumphant communist revolution in 2 years at most. > _______________________________________________ > pen-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l > _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
