[RunD1987]

Originally Posted by WouldLoveTo

So how can the STATE tell the TOWNS that they can no longer charge what they do on car taxes? That's not state money, it's town money.

And where do you think the TOWNS will get the money from when this is taken from them? Gee, maybe homeowners and businesses?

Stupid, stupid idea. Everyone needs to get a handle on their spending first. Until then, this is just another feel good exercise.

They should I spent closet to $1,000 in car taxes the past 3-4 year's living in Waterbury it's ridiculous. Don't even know where that money goes to for the town.

[kidyankee764]

This again?

[ctguy87]

Originally Posted by JayCT

This is old news that has been discussed here before. Most of the people leaving are retiring baby boomers who put off retiring during the last recession. Just another sensationalizing article. Jay

It is old news, and it's also current news. The trend isn't bucking and as a CT resident you should be concerned. If boomers are leaving, and millennials aren't staying, who does that leave?

From the article:

Connecticut has seen it’s net population shrink every year for the last five years.

5 years!

[MiaMia411]

Seems like they pretty much nailed it.

[mlassoff]

Originally Posted by ctguy87

If boomers are leaving, and millennials aren't staying, who does that leave?

People who are economically productive?

[ctguy87]

Originally Posted by mlassoff

People who are economically productive?

The boomers retiring to FL own homes and pay substantial taxes. Millennials love to spend their money and young educated talent is an asset the state should want to keep so they plant roots and start a family here - so I don't see your point. I'm not sure how anyone can justify or defend the negative net migration in CT.

[MMS02760]

The Ct economic climate must be booming. People apparently have so much money to burn, we need another casino.

[mlassoff]

Originally Posted by ctguy87

The boomers retiring to FL own homes and pay substantial taxes. Millennials love to spend their money and young educated talent is an asset the state should want to keep so they plant roots and start a family here - so I don't see your point. I'm not sure how anyone can justify or defend the negative net migration in CT.

You asked who is left here... Very economically productive people are left here. If you don't want the answer, don't ask the question.

This state is obviously economically productive-- Looks at state per capital GDP. The boomers homes aren't going unsold-- Even with net negative migration the overwhelming majority of those moving out are being replaced... We're not growing, which is certainly a concern, but let's not pretend it means something that it doesn't.

This state has never been a big destination for the younger generations-- People move here when they've established families and careers.

Of course we should want to keep young talent here-- however, this is not a new problem.

[GoHuskies]

Originally Posted by mlassoff

This state has never been a big destination for the younger generations-- People move here when they've established families and careers.

I think this bears repeating.

[ctguy87]

Originally Posted by mlassoff

This state is obviously economically productive-- Looks at state per capital GDP. The boomers homes aren't going unsold-- Even with net negative migration the overwhelming majority of those moving out are being replaced... We're not growing, which is certainly a concern, but let's not pretend it means something that it doesn't.

Your last sentence - let's continue to ignore significant trends, declining state revenue, and ever increasing budget gaps exacerbated by losing residents. Let's keep subsidizing Hartford, Bridgeport, and Waterbury, and push out wealthy suburban taxpayers who wind up footing the bill and are fed up (Just look at the governor election results town by town.) Let's keep saying CT is a great place to live today! And it is (I've never disputed this) - but it won't be forever if these trends continue.