[dmix]

Not sure why everyone is so obsessed with the federal elections. Things take time and often bubble up via states.

The US needs more decentralization if it want's progress on a realistic timeline (ie, one that reflects the populace). It also helps weeds out the more radical emotion-driven stuff.

[roenxi]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but California is the US's highest spending state [0] with a budget of around 200 billion. Its entire budget is smaller than the US Federal government's deficit (measured in single digit trillions).

The reason everyone cares about federal elections is because there are earth-shattering amounts of money involved. The resources that get consumed have to come from somewhere.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._state_budgets

[refurb]

That money is mostly entitlement spending.

You can change a lot of the states level that has nothing to do with entitlements.

[akvadrako]

It's about half entitlements, 27% Medic* + 22% SS, and this percentage will increase quickly.

But that's still $3T for other stuff in average years. Plus they just passed $2T of extra one-off spending for the second time in a year.

That means the Federal government is basically taking all the spending power of the nation and then redistributing it, giving it enormous power compared to the states.

[afterburner]

Because federal laws can throw a LOT of cold water onto state legalization, if the federal government wanted to. Hence why elections matter.

[lotsofpulp]

If anything, the US’s progress is being held back by federal government inaction. The freedom to move across state lines causes many problems that require taxpayer subsidies to solve.

For example, no state can offer taxpayer funded healthcare, because it would attract benefit recipients and would repel taxpayers.

And no state can offer housing for homeless, for the same reason as the above.

[SamoyedFurFluff]

> And no state can offer housing for homeless, for the same reason as the above.

I thought Utah had housing for homeless?