Dallas, TX

[KrazyHorse]

Why are you concentrating only on the revenue side of the balance sheet?

EDIT: PA 5500$/cap TX 3800$/cap

2007 numbers

http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/287.html

[Hauldren Collider]

there's this thing called SAVINGS

given that you always talk about living in the hood AS, I'm not surprised you don't know about it

[Al B. Sure!]

Why are you concentrating only on the revenue side of the balance sheet?

EDIT: PA 5500$/cap TX 3800$/cap

2007 numbers

http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/287.html

Yeah but why is Texas more 'efficient' in their spending? That doesn't make any sense either unless Texas has proportionately fewer cops, fewer firefighters, etc. etc. Texas is bigger with a bigger population. Generally speaking, they should be spending MORE than PA.

[Al B. Sure!]

there's this thing called SAVINGS

What? Savings? How is that relevant for a state's budget? As far as I know (though that rainy day fund contradicts it), state's don't save any money.

[KrazyHorse]

Yeah but why is Texas more 'efficient' in their spending? That doesn't make any sense either unless Texas has proportionately fewer cops, fewer firefighters, etc. etc.

So in your world almost the entire state budget goes to pay the salaries of cops and firefighters?

[Al B. Sure!]

So in your world almost the entire state budget goes to pay the salaries of cops and firefighters?

I said etc. etc. Meaning all city workers, social services, everything you can think of under those etc.'s. Texas presumably has the same things they need to pay for as Pennsylvania does.

Actually, almost none of a STATE's budget goes to cops (except highway patrol)

[Hauldren Collider]

California has retarded public welfare and regulation laws. Texas is more financially sound and sane

Texas

And texas in fact DOES save money. Maybe more states should do that, but it would require a budget surplus. Again, Texas

[Al B. Sure!]

But how do they have a budget surplus? How do they provide presumably the same services to their citizens at less cost per capita?

[KrazyHorse]

I said etc. etc. Meaning all city workers, social services, everything you can think of under those etc.'s. Texas presumably has the same things they need to pay for as Pennsylvania does.

Actually, almost none of a STATE's budget goes to cops (except highway patrol)

Nothing NEEDS to get paid for.

The PA state legislature has chosen to provide more/"better quality" of certain types of services than TX does. Unfortunately, because they're buying **** for other people, they don't have much of a clue how much those people value the services, and may not even CARE how much those people value those services. etc etc covers a lot of ground, dude. And waste is in the eye of the beholder.

[KrazyHorse]

But how do they have a budget surplus? How do they provide presumably the same services to their citizens at less cost per capita?

????

What makes you think that they provide "the same services"? They provide a number of services which fall into the same general CATEGORY as the services provided in PA, but there's a lot of product differentiation.

Good lord...

[Hauldren Collider]

Texas is fiscally conservative and therefore better run than PA

[Al B. Sure!]

HC:

I don't think PA was fiscally doing great during Tom Ridge's tenure either.

[Hauldren Collider]

I'm trolling the likes of Oerdin and Kidicious

[Dinner]

Eh? I hadn't even posted in this thread until I responded to you now with this post.

[Al B. Sure!]

Kidicious hasn't been in here either I don't think.

And since when has Oerdin and Kidicious become the ultra-liberals of Apolyton? Actually, where are all our communists and socialists that used to dominate Apolyton? A few weeks ago when we were talking about economic knowledge and liberals, the discussion was dominated by libertarianism. Where's Chegitz and all the other raging commies?