Ranking the states by their fiscal health

The massive federal debt, and the annual deficits that add to it, are frequently in the news. Far less covered are the overall financial challenges facing the fifty states. A substantial portion of fiscal problems are attributed to underfunded pensions and medical expenses.

While each individual state possesses individual strengths and weaknesses, some generalizations can be made. Overall, citizens of high tax states are leaving to take up residence in lower taxed states. IRS data reveals that:

Texas has the largest positive net migration1 of 152,477 people (number of exemptions) on 72,032 individual income tax returns, followed by Florida (73,789 people on 27,991 returns) and South Carolina (28,905 people on 13,475 returns).
New York had the largest negative net migration of 113,861 people on 51,825 returns.
Regionally, Texas accounted for more than half of the net migration into the South, while residents leaving New York made up more than half of the net loss from the Northeast.
Returns filed by primary taxpayers ages 34 or younger were at least twice as likely as those in any other age category to have migrated to another State between Calendar Years 2012 and 2013.
The single largest net migration was from New York to Florida (17,355 people on 7,861 returns).

Sending a well drafted e-mail could be an tadalafil canadian pharmacy continue reading this economical baby shower invitation. There are two methods of brachytherapy – permanent seed implantation and high dose shop for viagra rate (HDR) temporary brachytherapy. In respect of quality and effectiveness of on sale here levitra uk, we are now getting the medicine with the lowest cost. Male sexual dysfunction is mostly a circumstance in sildenafil 50mg browse for more info which victim fails to sustain a stiff erection during sexual process and become dissatisfied.
The Americans for Tax Reform organizationnoted that in the latest year for which complete records are available (2013) Arizona gained the most in terms of “wealth migration,” predominately from high tax, high regulation states.

“In 2013 Arizona had the largest net population gains from:

California 5,366 ($317 million)
Illinois 3,701 ($238 million)
Washington 1,538 ($82 million)
New Mexico 1,304 ($50 million)
New York 1,251 ($96 million)

States like New York, Illinois, and California were 2013’s biggest losers.”

Overall fiscal health of each individual state has been ranked by the Mercatus Center at George Mason University .

“With new spending commitments for Medicaid and growing long-term obligations for pensions and health care benefits, states must be ever vigilant to consider both the short- and long-term consequences of policy decisions. Understanding how each state is performing in regard to a variety of fiscal indicators can help state policymakers as they make these decisions. A closer analysis of the individual metrics behind the ranking shows how each state’s fiscal condition should be assessed. Notably, nearly all states have unfunded pension liabilities that are large relative to state personal income, indicating that all states need to take a closer look at their unfunded pensions, which represent a significant portion of each state’s economy. Another financial crisis could mean serious trouble for many states that are otherwise fiscally stable.”

According to the Mercatus research, Alaska, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska and Florida are currently the most stable, while Illinois, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Connecticut, and New York at the bottom.

The complete rankings, from best to worst: Alaska, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Florida, Wyoming, Ohio, Tennessee, Oklahoma, Montana, Utah, Nevada, Alabama, Missouri, Idaho, Indiana, South Carolina, Iowa, Texas, New Hampshire, Virginia, Colorado, Washington, Kansas, Oregon, Georgia, North Carolina, Wisconsin, Arkansas, Delaware, Minnesota, Arizona, Mississippi, Michigan, Louisiana, New Mexico, Maryland, Rhode Island, Vermont, Hawaii, Pennsylvania, Maine, West Virginia, California, Kentucky, New York, Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Illinois.

Quick Analysis

Putin’s Saber Rattling

Earlier this week, President Biden reversed his 2022 decision, authorizing the provision of antipersonnel land mines to the Ukrainian government. It follows an earlier Administration authorization to allow the use of an advanced American missile system capable of striking as deep as 100 miles inside Russian territory. The US election season may be ending, but both Russia and the West show no indication of stepping down the conflict. Russian propaganda continues to swell as the Kremlin increases its threats to use nuclear weapons against the West. Last week Andrey Sushentsov, program director of the pro-Kremlin think tank Valdai Discussion Club (VDC), published an article on growing nuclear tensions in the region. Official Russian language in the last few years has been threatening. Since the US election, rhetoric like that in the Sushentsov article, has approached the level of nuclear blackmail. The VDC article’s main theme centers on Russia’s intent to directly confront the West militarily if the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) becomes involved in Russia’s conflict with Ukraine. “On the one hand, these threats are intended to frighten the West, but on the other, Russian propagandists themselves are starting to believe in the inevitability of escalation,” according to Ksenia Kirillova of the Jamestown Foundation. On November 11, Sushentsov wrote that “The conflict will reach a completely new level, with unpredictable consequences for Europe and the entire world.” Kirillova points out that Putin’s distorted image of the world is divorced from reality and is causing the Kremlin to issue demands that are impossible to fulfill. Financial and other Russian resources needed to support Putin’s war are growing scarcer at the same time. This week the Kremlin announced a reduction of payments to its soldiers. Recently North Korea acknowledged it was sending soldiers to fight in Ukraine as Putin is running out of bodies to use as cannon fire. The war is not going well for Russia. One question floating around the Washington intelligence community is whether Putin will act out of desperation before President-elect Trump assumes office. In recent months the Russian propaganda machine is spewing out materials from fairly reputable analytical platforms inside the country. Kirillova says that “Kremlin ‘experts’ do not conceal that such threats are only intended to break the West psychologically, as they themselves are not prepared for full-scale nuclear war.” Despite Russia’s lack of preparation for an all-out war with the West, the expanding nuclear rhetoric carries with it an increase in the threat of a full-scale war in multiple theaters of operation. In June 2023 a founder of the Russian Council on Foreign and Defense Policy, Sergey Karaganov, called for “delivering a pre-emptive strike of retaliation” on Poland to force the West to surrender. In the previous month, Dmitry Suslov, a direct of research programs at the policy center proposed organizing “a demonstration nuclear explosion” aimed at intimidating the West. In September, President Putin announced a reappraisal of Russian nuclear doctrine after speaking earlier in the year at the plenary session of the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum and jokingly calling Suslov a “scary person.” Pavel Baev, writing in the European Daily Monitor, says “Putin intends his announcement to mark an escalation of nuclear brinkmanship and influence the proceedings of future Ukrainian peace efforts.” Putin is expanding the list of environmental conditions that are acceptable for using a nuclear weapon and incorporating it into Russian military doctrine. Baev adds that “The ups and downs of Russian brinkmanship are disconnected from the kinetic battles of the war, correlating instead with Ukrainian peace offensives, such as Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s first peace summit in Bürgenstock, Switzerland.” Despite the increase in vitriolic language, in a You Tube video published a week before the US presidential election, Karaganov openly assured the West the primary goal of the escalation is to break the American spirit and that of the West, not outright nuclear war. By Election Day in the US, with political prognosticators predicting a win for former president Trump, Karaganov changed his tune and called for an increased role in nuclear deterrence. Kirillova points out that Western concessions to Russia are unlikely to reduce the risk of nuclear escalation. The distorted reality inside the Kremlin continues to push that President-elect Trump is an adherent of “world government,” that Ukraine will create a nuclear weapon, and Russia must prepare for a nuclear conflagration to achieve its ambitions for a new world order. President-elect Trump has indicated he will not agree to concessions that destabilize Europe, the Middle East or other regions. Going forward a strong US foreign policy may be the most stabilizing course the West can count on to restrain Putin and his intent to rebuild the Russian empire. Daria Novak served in the U.S. State Dept. Illustration: Pixabay

Our Latest Television Program

New Era in World Affairs

There will be a dramatic change in Washington in the aftermath of the election. What will this mean for America’s national security and foreign affairs? Our guests, former CIA officer and Vice President at the Center for Security Policy Clair Lopez, along with ret. Col. John Mills, (author of The Nation Will Follow) provide extraordinary insights. If you missed the program on your local station, catch it here: https://rumble.com/v5oonnb-the-american-political-zone-november-12-2024.html