Like the overlapping generations model

We can do a good job with three portfolios, youngsters, parents and gramps. 

Liquidity, other wise known as coin tosses, are allocated across the three uncertain distributions such that, in aggregate, they are mostly a centered Gaussian, all transactions are maximally separated. This is the Markov 3-tuple,  a portfolio balancing problem.

If it works then there exists a multi-price level auction between gramps and parents. It must be the case that each person goes to auction twice a generation, flip flopping positions.

A model can be maintained measuring demographic ratios; from sequence to sequence.  Then one can compute relative interest charges needed to maintain the fairness of each distribution. Gains when the particular distribution is noticably a weighted coin toss. And the opposite, an option price.  This is a portfolio problem, the problem of a manager limited to sequential bets for the client across three complete  sectors. That is, there is a known boundary condition and the sectors cover the whole bounded region. 

There should be a Lie graph paper for finance. The finance engineer can plot the relative binomials as rotations.

Revenue sharing is another hidden Markov.  

The executive branch is effectively managed by the legislature, via power of the purse. So, the issue remains the relative cost benefit of any giving program across the senate vs the house. But they are both closed, there is no great western expansion. Thre senat is a heavily weighted coin, and needs to hedge across some distance. The house shares the hedge during negotiations. The effect is to balance their portfolios. The negotiations will include  a reserve, which they split mostly evenly. This makes the hedging for districts proportional to state hedging, estimates that dead weight, and allows them to manage the executive more accurately. I works because the revenue sharing agreement is a very easily balanced market, each the the trader groups sets fixed, there is no worry about risk equalization. Almost as if the founder knew about this solution ever since Hamilton absorbed their debts..

Partition by state

We know a large middle of the states are neutral to revenue sharing. The last bid taken is the smallest state against the most isolated district. That would be me vs some lady in Vermont. The two of us, equally stuck for the cost of some mammoth hospital somewhere else. We are equally populated, within error, and have about the same internal economies of scale. We will pick he nearest integer we can get, then asymmetrically  split the difference to keep it fair. No one is going to pay for some useless hospital within our boundaries.