California usually complains its taxed pop sends more money in than it receives in federal largesse. That we are subsidizing “red states”. Not sure who’s right since both make these claims against each other.
This isn't incompatible with what I said.
California pays more than it receives, but less than it should given the benefits that it receives (and the agreed upon national tax rate).
It's good that SALT has been limited, and the investment that the US has made in certain urban environments (eg, founding Silicon Valley) will be properly distributed across the country instead of hoarded by the states where those investments were made.
How are you measuring benefits received if not by dollars received?
Which, incidentally, is why I'm pretty happy with my state being a net payer. I want things to be better for everybody. But a little gratitude would be nice.