DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**AngelBee** · 12-30-2005, 05:54 PM

Its possible we could move some of the federal agencies outside of Washington and move them to other cities. That's a good idea. Tho given the logistics involved and the disparities of our current tax-n-spend policies, I'd recommend ranking the various departments and/or agencies by budget, and moving them either to states that current receive more in gov't expenditures than they pay (excluding pork, if possible), to ones with the lowest per-capita incomes, and/or just to ones that can be had the cheapest. This could be done in conjunction with appropriate tax reforms, especially if the first option is chosen.

(That ratio by which citizens recieve less benefit from federal funds than what they pay in varies considerably from state to state. One would be less likely to find this offensive if the reason was "Because ND houses the Dept of Interior" rather than simply "Because".)

12-30-2005, 05:54 PM	#7
AngelBee Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 462 Senior Member	Its possible we could move some of the federal agencies outside of Washington and move them to other cities. That's a good idea. Tho given the logistics involved and the disparities of our current tax-n-spend policies, I'd recommend ranking the various departments and/or agencies by budget, and moving them either to states that current receive more in gov't expenditures than they pay (excluding pork, if possible), to ones with the lowest per-capita incomes, and/or just to ones that can be had the cheapest. This could be done in conjunction with appropriate tax reforms, especially if the first option is chosen. (That ratio by which citizens recieve less benefit from federal funds than what they pay in varies considerably from state to state. One would be less likely to find this offensive if the reason was "Because ND houses the Dept of Interior" rather than simply "Because".)
	Quote