Hit a roadblock in my plan to move to Buffalo (Hamilton: credit, home)

[ckhthankgod]

Originally Posted by Canerican

I'm saying if there is a recall, you don't need to do an inspection to know that. As you have just proven, there is a government database full of recalls. NYS could just as easily use that database, and if the vehicle you are registering is on that list, require an inspection to ensure that the problem is taken care of.

I can't believe that someone would defend a completely useless inspection on brand new cars. It makes no sense. I figured out a solution in 30 seconds, it's really not complicated.

My point is that you are talking about immediately, but what about after a year?

Also, here are the actual rules for inspections: http://www.nydmv.state.ny.us/vehsafe.htm#einspect I guess it is a lie that they inspect emissions on brand new vehicles after all.

http://www.nydmv.state.ny.us/broch/c-50.htm

http://www.nydmv.state.ny.us/vehsafe.htm

[Canerican]

Originally Posted by ckhthankgod

My point is that you are talking about immediately, but what about after a year?

I would love to see that list of fatal accidents caused by car failures which never had a recall (either before or after that faulty part).

I have a 2008 model year car, runs great, no problems. Won't have any rust for at least 10 years.

I understand inspections every 2 years to check for things like bad brakes, tires, electronics, and bulbs... But every year for cars under 5 years old is very excessive.

You want to stimulate NY's car market? Allow all new cars to get only one inspection (2.5 years in) for 5 years for all brand new cars purchased. It's a small perk that will make people buy new cars, create NEEDED jobs (not useless jobs inspecting brand new cars, which were already inspected at the plant). Of course if there is a recall, you must get the repair, and submit proof of this, or have your registration revokes... but that is a reasonable law.

If it even increases sales by 2%, which is may well, it would be worth it. I would certainly consider a new car over used if I could do that.

There is a serious lack of common sense both on this forum and in New York as a whole. This is why we are the laughing stock of the nation, and WNY the laughing stock of NY. With a few exceptions, people with good ideas are in huge deficit here.

I guess it is a lie that they inspect emissions on brand new vehicles after all.

Well... I never said that, I know they don't do emissions testing...

[ckhthankgod]

Originally Posted by Canerican

I would love to see that list of fatal accidents caused by car failures which never had a recall (either before or after that faulty part).

I have a 2008 model year car, runs great, no problems. Won't have any rust for at least 10 years.

I understand inspections every 2 years to check for things like bad brakes, tires, electronics, and bulbs... But every year for cars under 5 years old is very excessive.

You want to stimulate NY's car market? Allow all new cars to get only one inspection (2.5 years in) for 5 years for all brand new cars purchased. It's a small perk that will make people buy new cars, create NEEDED jobs (not useless jobs inspecting brand new cars, which were already inspected at the plant). Of course if there is a recall, you must get the repair, and submit proof of this, or have your registration revokes... but that is a reasonable law.

If it even increases sales by 2%, which is may well, it would be worth it. I would certainly consider a new car over used if I could do that.

There is a serious lack of common sense both on this forum and in New York as a whole. This is why we are the laughing stock of the nation, and WNY the laughing stock of NY. With a few exceptions, people with good ideas are in huge deficit here.


Well... I never said that, I know they don't do emissions testing...

Where do you get this from? I think someone needs to chill out, understand what humility means and put things into perspective and not get so personal.

Anyway, if read the information, it states that they don't do what people said about brand new cars in the first place in regards to inspections. Here's some interesting information: What Causes Car Accidents? - Smart Motorist

Auto Accidents Caused by Mechanical Failures

[donbuy]

Originally Posted by Canerican

Which Southern states have higher taxes than Buffalo overall?

There is a lot more to cost of living than just property taxes. For example NY State's income taxes are only in the middle of the pack of the 50 states. They might look higher on a chart that only shows the top rate. What those lists fail to explain is that the 1st $15,000 or so of income in NY is at a zero tax rate. Many other states such as Virginia start their state income tax at the first dollar of income. Also many southern states such as Virginia and the Carolina's charge an annual property tax on your car. The ANNUAL property tax on a Camry in Virginia is in excess of $500.00 plus you still have to pay $40-80 per year to register it. Also states such as Virginia charge a 6% sales tax on everything including cloths and groceries, far in excess of the 4% and 0% you would pay in WNY.

It's easy to get carried away by the local media and think that everything is so much more expensive in NY but it is simply not true. For example part of my occupancy cost is my water bill. I pay about $80 per quarter - my retired uncle in Florida pays $120.00 per month.

Garbage pickup is included in my property tax but my father in law down in Virginia has to shell out $600 per year for his - in addition to his property tax.

Hunt Real estate did a study of property taxes and found that on a tax per square foot basis the Buffalo area property tax was in the middle of the pack for the 100 largest metros in the USA. And remember this the income and property taxes you pay in NY ARE deductible on your Federal income tax and reduce the Federal tax you pay while the excessive garbage fees, water fees and sales taxes you pay down south are NOT deductible on your Federal tax return and do not decrease your federal taxes

[donbuy]

Originally Posted by Vex

I don't know how you can possibly argue that Upstate NY is not suffering from a heavy tax burden. That's why everyone's moving away.

According to the US Census Bureau (www.census.gov) the percentage of people moving out of the Buffalo Metro is lower than the national average for the 376 metros. The reason for the Buffalo decline in population is NOT out migration. It is 1) an older population resulting in a lower than average birth rate and a higher than average death rate and 2) a very low in migration.

Intersting to note that according to the University at Buffalo the percentage of graduates remaining in Buffalo 5 years after graduation in 2008 was actually higher than the percentage of graduates that were originally from Buffalo. This was highlighted in the Buffalo News in an article titles "Brain Drain - Not Around Here" on May 17th 2008 forever shattering the "Myth" of a Buffalo brain drain by citing independently verifiable hard data.

[Canerican]

Originally Posted by donbuy

According to the US Census Bureau (www.census.gov) the percentage of people moving out of the Buffalo Metro is lower than the national average for the 376 metros.

That is simply outright false.

Here is the Census data (.xls file)

http://www.census.gov/popest/metro/t...EST2008-05.xls

Look it up for yourself, stop pulling numbers out of the air, you are dead wrong.

[Vex]

Well first, the standard deduction is 7,500, not 15,000.

Originally Posted by donbuy

The reason for the Buffalo decline in population is NOT out migration. It is 1) an older population resulting in a lower than average birth rate and a higher than average death rate and 2) a very low in migration.

Dude, it has an older population because all the young people are moving away, thus skewing the statistic. When I ran my landscaping company I can't tell you how many middle aged and old people I did work for that told me stories how their families all moved away and now they're all alone. Old timers are clinging to this area because its all they know. My generation is much more mobile and we're heading out.

Here's a quote I came across while reading City on the Edge. Its from Robert Wilmers' (chairman of M&T) during the 2006 shareholder's meeting:
"Make no mistake: this is not business as usual. The magnitude and the duration of population loss among the young is unprecedented in our history. There has never been a previous 10-year period of the upstate region when there has been any decline in this most vital portion of our population."

I have no doubt that HUNT's study came to the conclusion it did. It probably took into account the over 10,000 vacant homes in Buffalo, the east side and the lower west side. But the question is, who the hell wants to live there? Those areas skew the data, as they have such incredibly low market values, their assessments tend to look reasonable.

[crescent22]

Can't say I can think of any reason to move to Buffalo without a job. Do you have a dying relative there?

[Sumermarie]

Originally Posted by Canerican

That is simply outright false.

Here is the Census data (.xls file)

http://www.census.gov/popest/metro/t...EST2008-05.xls

Look it up for yourself, stop pulling numbers out of the air, you are dead wrong.

You're correct. Here's a sorted list, from the worst on. However, I would like to see the new years numbers as this only covers from 2007-2008.

1. Detroit-Warren-Livonia, MI 4,425,110 4,457,523 -32,413
2. Cleveland-Elyria-Mentor, OH 2,088,291 2,094,885 -6,594
3. Flint, MI 428,790 434,027 -5,237
4. Youngstown-Warren-Boardman, OH-PA 565,947 570,517 -4,570
5. Pittsburgh, PA 2,351,192 2,354,159 -2,967
6. Jackson, MI 160,180 162,706 -2,526
7. Punta Gorda, FL 150,060 152,479 -2,419
8. Dayton, OH 836,544 838,828 -2,284
9. Buffalo-Niagara Falls, NY 1,124,309 1,126,513 -2,204
10. Lawton, OK 111,772 113,931 -2,159
11. Hinesville-Fort Stewart, GA 69,943 71,726 -1,783
12. Providence-New Bedford-Fall River, RI-MA 1,596,611 1,598,348 -1,737 13. Deltona-Daytona Beach-Ormond Beach, FL 498,036 499,734 -1,698
14. Toledo, OH 649,104 650,770 -1,666
15. Saginaw-Saginaw Township North, MI 200,745 202,272 -1,527
16. Fort Walton Beach-Crestview-Destin, FL 179,693 181,087 -1,394
17. Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, VA-NC 1,658,292 1,659,679 -1,387

[donbuy]

Originally Posted by Canerican

That is simply outright false.

Here is the Census data (.xls file)

http://www.census.gov/popest/metro/t...EST2008-05.xls

Look it up for yourself, stop pulling numbers out of the air, you are dead wrong.

Actually it is simply a true fact. I do not dispute the data you posted. Those are the current estimates. But you did not post the whole report. Perhaps it is too complex for you to grasp but I'll give it a try. There are four components to any communities population change - migration out, migration in, births and deaths. Buffalo ranks at right about the national average in the number of people moving out per 1,000 of population of the metro in any given year, Buffalo ranks below the national average in the number of births per 1,000 people in a given year, Buffalo ranks above the national average in the number of deaths per 1,000 population in a given year and Buffalo ranks near the bottom in the amount of in migration in a given year. When you put all four together you get the approxomtely 2,000 population loss your link showed.

The current culprit of our population decline is not current out migration but rather the massive out migration in the 1975-1985 period. It was that out migration that caused our current minscule birth>deat ratio.

Could be worse of course the Pittsburgh metro which suffered an even greater outmigration in the 1975-1985 period is the only million plus metro where deaths actually outnumber births.

Here is a link to an article mentioning some of the facts I have just stated.

http://74.125.93.132/search?q=cache:...&ct=clnk&gl=us