The implicit, and sometimes explicit, claim of some of those raising the alarm about increasing revenues to invest in education (see Mark Price’s recent blog post) and make Pennsylvania fiscally sound by closing its budget deficit is, of course, that lower revenues (i.e. lower taxes) as a share of a state’s economy are a goal in themselves.
The implicit, and sometimes explicit, claim of some of those raising the alarm about increasing revenues to invest in education (see Mark Price’s recent blog post) and make Pennsylvania fiscally sound by closing its budget deficit is, of course, that lower revenues (i.e. lower taxes) as a share of a state’s economy are a goal in themselves.
A recent study by the Population Reference Bureau found, to the contrary, that “States with Higher Tax Rates Are Better for Children.” All five of the states with the lowest upward mobility in America (North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, and Mississippi – see this map) are in the bottom half of states for share of state and local taxes as a percentage of personal income (using Tax Policy Center data). And three of the five are in the bottom dozen states.
So if you don’t care about the next generation or upward mobility, it may be fine to fixate on reducing state taxes without even asking what the revenue would be used for; but if you do care about giving our children an opportunity for upward mobility, you may want to support Gov. Wolf’s proposed investment in education from cradle to college and career.