[alexander_busek]

Statehood for PR should only be considered when PR can support itself. < whisper > That ain’t gonna happen.

Then perhaps all those states which are currently net "takers" of federal largesse - who, by your definition, can "support themselves" - should be expelled.

Regards,

[ConservativeMind]

Two major forms of “federal largesse” determines those net takers.

1. Retirees who get their Social Security and Medicare, but have retired to that state and likely lived elsewhere when earlier employed.

2. Welfare recipients of everything under the sun (food stamps, Welfare, SSI, housing assistance, etc.) who have rarely worked throughout their lives. These government pay outs likely dwarf retirement-oriented payouts on a one-for-one basis.

Puerto Rico is hugely imbalanced to “2,” while most states like Florida are hugely imbalanced to “1.”

[Svartalfiar]

Then perhaps all those states which are currently net "takers" of federal largesse - who, by your definition, can "support themselves" - should be expelled.

And how are you calculating net givers/takers?

Do you include Social Security? Many people retire to other States than they lived, meaning working States will contribute, while Florida and others will "take".

What about military spending? Some States have several bases, others have none. But this funding goes to protect every State, not just the ones with military facilities. But, those are the only States that get the side benefit of that spending eventually going into the local economy.

What about tariff income? Does CA or Texas get credit for LA/Long Beach or Houston/Galveston? Those dollars are coming "from" that State, even if they aren't actually from the State.