What would the change in fiscal structures and priorities I have outlined thus far mean for the economy of the one part of the state whose economy people talk about: Upstate New York? It would mean the ability to have a much lower cost structure, provided Upstate was willing to live with lower public expenditures, by localizing decisions about revenues and expenditures on the margin. Upstate could choose to go on spending more if it wanted, but without draining Downstate to pay for it.
Consider the school aid formula I suggested. It would allow Upstate New York – everyone in every part of it – to have a national average level of public school expenditures per student with little or no local tax burden. Zip. Nothing. And, since incomes and spending are higher Downstate (whether that buys a higher quality of life is an open question), a substantial share of the state income and sales taxes used to fund that education Upstate would be collected outside the region, in Downstate New York. Meaning an average level of spending would cost Upstate a below-average level of state and local taxes. Even if spending were increased to 25% more than the national average, state taxes would still cover 80% the total, keeping local property taxes low.