Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Mass exodus is a bit of a dramatic way to put it, but I do know a lot of people who have left. Most have left because their jobs have transferred them, some have left for reasons I did (access to major city and airport preferred due to job), and many retire out of state. CT hasn’t lost population, since for everyone leaving, someone is replacing them. But you have to look at who is leaving and who is coming. It’s statistically two different demographics.
The one thing that should concern CT is the amount of seven figure income families leaving and being replaced by people making 200k. Like I said earlier, I’ll be curious to see what the next census says about the income in CT. Tax returns last year showed concerning stats and the media jumped on the fact that CT had the slowest income growth in the Northeast by quite a bit. That should be far more of a concern than any claims of population decline.
Actually think that will be a good thing for the State.
Demand and taxes had made Connecticut to expensive. Hopefully this will reset the scales and create more of a balance with COL in the State.
Actually think that will be a good thing for the State.
Demand and taxes had made Connecticut to expensive. Hopefully this will reset the scales and create more of a balance with COL in the State.
I think you have this backwards. If more people leave the state taxes, mainly property taxes will rise.
Simply put if it takes 100$ to run a town and there are 10 people in that town everyone pays 10$. If 5 people leave now everyone pays 20$. The costs do not go down if people leave. There might be some monetary saving attempts like school consolidation or layoffs but overall the cost is the cost. Roads need to be kept up no matter if 10 people use them or 1000 people use them. Same with parks and services.
I did not vote for Lamont but if he really does not use the rainy day fund to balance the budget he will have a little smile from me. With the economic uncertainty coming up, cash is what will be needed in the future if The world slides back a bit. Smart move on his part to have a safety net.
I think you have this backwards. If more people leave the state taxes, mainly property taxes will rise.
Simply put if it takes 100$ to run a town and there are 10 people in that town everyone pays 10$. If 5 people leave now everyone pays 20$. The costs do not go down if people leave. There might be some monetary saving attempts like school consolidation or layoffs but overall the cost is the cost. Roads need to be kept up no matter if 10 people use them or 1000 people use them. Same with parks and services.
I did not vote for Lamont but if he really does not use the rainy day fund to balance the budget he will have a little smile from me. With the economic uncertainty coming up, cash is what will be needed in the future if The world slides back a bit. Smart move on his part to have a safety net.
Property taxes are local. Waterbury property taxes won't be impacted if someone in Greenwich leaves. There's enough demand for Manhattan-commutable real estate in towns with top school systems that I think it's unlikely housing prices will decline in lower FFC if some top earners bail out.
State income tax is another thing entirely. Rich people bailing out directly impacts the social programs for poor people that dominate the non-interest/unfunded pension liability part of the budget.
Actually think that will be a good thing for the State.
Demand and taxes had made Connecticut to expensive. Hopefully this will reset the scales and create more of a balance with COL in the State.
Huh?
Wealthy people leaving the state is never a good thing. Look at what affluent communities contribute to the state vs the poor communies, most of which receive. A significant decline in seven figure households will absolutely impact the state in a negative way, not “reset the scales” or balance out. This will cause COL to rise, primarily taxes, even if housing declines (which I don’t see happening in Greenwich or that immediate area).
Mr 250 is correct.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeoffD
State income tax is another thing entirely. Rich people bailing out directly impacts the social programs for poor people that dominate the non-interest/unfunded pension liability part of the budget.
CT needs reforms to revamp the relationship between local and state government.
Mass caps property tax increases at 2.5% unless there is an override. CA has prop 13 which is a bit extreme.
CT spending needs to be more controlled with having an independent inspector general and actual real procurement regulations. Otherwise local governments can get taken for rides they do not want to go down. Policies of making deals make little sense.
Local government needs to be more issue based vs party based. At least in Mass people don't openly say they are republican or democrat loudly (beyond cities that is). If a town says they need a republican or democrat in office that has just 15,000 people then something is wrong. All politics is local but not everything has to be political.
Take a page from some of the Mass reforms. In Mass public housing reforms of 2014 the local lists were abolished. Why? Because there were empty units in some parts of the state and a line around the block in others. Who pays for the bills to maintain empty buildings? You do! CT isn't that big of a state and it doesn't cross time zones so having a centralized list could house people faster and put riff raff on notice that they cannot assure that they "stay".
The foundation problem has to be dealt with. Otherwise taxes will rise in those areas and they might ask for a bailout like hartford. There's no easy fix for this. We're not talking years but decades. Everything needs to be tested first. It's like the building version of a STD. From there we can talk about what can and cannot survive as a structure and go from there.
Tolls technically can go up but if they do I think they'll be hard pressed to have it be just trucks. Personally I rather see gas go up vs tolls but given the difference in border areas who is going to fill up in CT?
There's some green shoots in hartford but it's going to take time. Legalizing weed and sports gambling might help but there has to be something other than just insurance. 60K insurance jobs might not be enough to prop up a state of 3.5 million. Blockchain could dramatically limit growth of insurance jobs and with automation and outsourcing it could further erode. Submarines are great in mystic but how many manufactures can you really have?
Put some more money in that farmers market in Hartford. It's huge and there could be serious potential in distribution between Boston and NYC
2018 School Ranking Connecticut: #2 (MA #1... a one two punch for the New England Democratic states...HINT HINT, IT ALL STARTS WITH EDUCATION)
.......................................Texas: #35 https://wallethub.com/edu/states-wit...t-schools/5335
etc.
etc.
etc.
What will the future of CT be?.....by the above I would say a hell of a lot better than TX.
PS: the above CT statistics are bought to you by the "worst" Governor in the US (according to many on this site).
We are not people who moved away from Connecticut in our early twenties and thought we would be gone forever.Connecticut in say 1990,is a lot different than it is now.I still enjoy our Connecticut visits and I like the state overall.Give me Connecticut of 1990 with no state income tax and strong government leadership and I am never moving anywhere.Connecticut has done a lot right in the past.
I detest the weather here in North Texas.The economy,opportunity and tax structure for someone in my income range can not be beat at this point.That is the problem.Once you see that schools,services and quality of life are identical or better,it is difficult to justify giving that up.I think a lot of people in my born in the eighties age range that make moves think that way.We still have family and friends in Connecticut and New Jersey but the majority of them have moved from both states.
On a side note,another factor that comes into play for a lot of people in my age range is work commute.If I were to hypothetically think about moving to a state like Connecticut or New Jersey where would I work?I love suburban living and I would not be willing to reside in an urban city environment.Doing the train thing an hour minimum each way into NYC from Connecticut or New Jersey in order to live in the same level of suburbia as I do here?I could not willingly put myself in that position.I have commuted 20 minutes to corporate jobs in the Legacy business area of Plano,TX by car for the past 11 years.Everything is relative and people have different priorities and needs.
I predict the resurgence of the suburban corpoarte office parks in the next decade.My fellow millennials are fleeting and they will age just like everyone else.Living in large cities in small apartments is a trend right now for a number of reasons.A lot of that has to do with delayed adulthood.35 is the new 25 for a lot of my peers.
I detest the weather here in North Texas.The economy,opportunity and tax structure for someone in my income range can not be beat at this point.That is the problem.Once you see that schools,services and quality of life are identical or better,it is difficult to justify giving that up.
By North Texas, are you talking the top Dallas suburbs? Somewhere like University Park is at parity with a top Connecticut suburb. Generally, Texas public schools are graded on the curve.
Mass exodus is a bit of a dramatic way to put it, but I do know a lot of people who have left. Most have left because their jobs have transferred them, some have left for reasons I did (access to major city and airport preferred due to job), and many retire out of state. CT hasn’t lost population, since for everyone leaving, someone is replacing them. But you have to look at who is leaving and who is coming. It’s statistically two different demographics.
The one thing that should concern CT is the amount of seven figure income families leaving and being replaced by people making 200k. Like I said earlier, I’ll be curious to see what the next census says about the income in CT. Tax returns last year showed concerning stats and the media jumped on the fact that CT had the slowest income growth in the Northeast by quite a bit. That should be far more of a concern than any claims of population decline.
If we have more people making in excess of $100,000 a year and more billionaires on the Forbes 400 list, how bad can things really be? Again the facts just don’t support significant concern. Jay
We are not people who moved away from Connecticut in our early twenties and thought we would be gone forever.Connecticut in say 1990,is a lot different than it is now.I still enjoy our Connecticut visits and I like the state overall.Give me Connecticut of 1990 with no state income tax and strong government leadership and I am never moving anywhere.Connecticut has done a lot right in the past.
I detest the weather here in North Texas.The economy,opportunity and tax structure for someone in my income range can not be beat at this point.That is the problem.Once you see that schools,services and quality of life are identical or better,it is difficult to justify giving that up.I think a lot of people in my born in the eighties age range that make moves think that way.We still have family and friends in Connecticut and New Jersey but the majority of them have moved from both states.
On a side note,another factor that comes into play for a lot of people in my age range is work commute.If I were to hypothetically think about moving to a state like Connecticut or New Jersey where would I work?I love suburban living and I would not be willing to reside in an urban city environment.Doing the train thing an hour minimum each way into NYC from Connecticut or New Jersey in order to live in the same level of suburbia as I do here?I could not willingly put myself in that position.I have commuted 20 minutes to corporate jobs in the Legacy business area of Plano,TX by car for the past 11 years.Everything is relative and people have different priorities and needs.
I predict the resurgence of the suburban corpoarte office parks in the next decade.My fellow millennials are fleeting and they will age just like everyone else.Living in large cities in small apartments is a trend right now for a number of reasons.A lot of that has to do with delayed adulthood.35 is the new 25 for a lot of my peers.
I am not sure what you’re u do but have you considered living bar a smaller city like Hartford? I disliked big city living and working and chose to live here and love it. I considered Texas when I was young but hated it. Endless sprawl, heat and kind of ugly landscape were just a few reasons I did not go there. Plus I did not like the very poor education I found outside a few choice areas that were and still are no cheaper than Connecticut.
It is interesting you mention the suburbs coming back. Despite all this talk of Millennials wanting to only live in the city, more now live in the suburbs than the city. I have been saying it was changing and Millenials are doing the exact same thing their parents and grandparents did. It was only delayed by the recession, careers and student loan debt. Jay
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
