U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-22-2010, 09:52 AM
 
Location: The land of sugar... previously Houston and Austin
5,429 posts, read 13,176,307 times
Reputation: 3642

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by CA790 View Post
Yes, the United States would be a poor country without blue states. Most ppl "fleeing" high cost states are mostly low-income people who pay no taxes anyway so nobody cares.
I think you're wrong on both counts.

As far as relocations, the movement maps show otherwise. Mostly middle class movements. And they are following the jobs, which coincide with the hiring companies. The low-income stay where they can continue to receive "free" services, if at all possible... why would they be motivated to move? And moving isn't cheap to do.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-22-2010, 09:56 AM
 
704 posts, read 1,502,980 times
Reputation: 629
What is amazing to me is that there are still people who try to dismiss this and pretend that the high-tax states are still somehow better off than the rest of us unwashed, tax-loathing swine. How can you honestly argue that California or New Jersey is better off than Texas, Arizona, Georgia, Colorado, or any other more pro-business, low-tax, conservative state?

If you're living on the public dole, or can actually afford to live in Manhattan or San Francisco, or the tonier New Jersey suburbs and pay the private school tuition, then life might indeed be nice. But if you're like the other 95% of us, then you're probably much more concerned about good schools for your kids, low taxes so you can keep more of what you make and afford a decent home for your family, and a general economic climate oriented around growth, not decline a la California and New York.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-22-2010, 10:00 AM
 
Location: Chicago, IL
1,954 posts, read 4,505,596 times
Reputation: 1817
Quote:
Originally Posted by ric75 View Post
Now now, those in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. The fact that you consider any red state the equivalent of a third world country speaks volumes of your own particular bias. It would be easy to argue that the reasons for the economic output of the states that you are lauding are also the reasons they are in so much trouble now that it comes time to pay the bills. There's certainly no quick answer here but for now it does appear that people are willing to have less services if it means less money coming out of their pockets as taxes and fees from their state and local governments.
What he is talking about is how blue states typically pay more into the federal government while red states typically receive more funding than they put in. On a federal government level the red states are generally leaching off of the blue states.

Here is the proof:

http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/sr139.pdf (broken link)

The Tax Foundation - Federal Spending Received Per Dollar of Taxes Paid by State, 2005

TaxProf Blog: Red States Feed at Federal Trough, Blue States Supply the Feed
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-22-2010, 10:05 AM
 
Location: Lewes, Delaware
3,466 posts, read 3,149,392 times
Reputation: 1876
Not to bring up an old argument but the U.S census places Delaware in the south, as Delaware would have the only northeast state with double digit growth. With 15%.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-22-2010, 10:25 AM
 
Location: Tower of Heaven
4,023 posts, read 6,436,914 times
Reputation: 1440
Quote:
Originally Posted by kyle19125 View Post
It actually shows the typical lack of understanding of economics exhibited by most Americans."Fleeing" high taxes to go to a lower tax state which sports a high unemployment rate and lack of infrastructure (mass transit/roads/poor schools) isn't particularly intelligent for the most part. Outside of California, the other states mentioned plus NH and VT have low unemployment rates, excellent schools and sufficient infrastructure. The short-sighted Fox News types will always see the benefit of fleeing to a state where taxes are lower, which helps maintain the balance otherwise. I say go for it if you're unhappy and enjoy all of those tax-free perks!
OK I know that now : you never learned economics ! So ignorant !
Austin has a good infrastructure, low taxes and one of the lowest unemployment rate.
I understand people, they flee high-tax states, it's normal.California and NY are for rich only, the middle-class workers can't live correctly there : expensive housing, high unemployment rate (soon 13% in California), high taxes (too high).People are voting with their feets
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-22-2010, 10:27 AM
 
Location: Tower of Heaven
4,023 posts, read 6,436,914 times
Reputation: 1440
Quote:
Originally Posted by James420 View Post
Not to bring up an old argument but the U.S census places Delaware in the south, as Delaware would have the only northeast state with double digit growth. With 15%.
Delaware is more pro-business than the other NE states
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-22-2010, 10:34 AM
 
370 posts, read 884,381 times
Reputation: 323
Quote:
Originally Posted by 5Lakes View Post
What he is talking about is how blue states typically pay more into the federal government while red states typically receive more funding than they put in. On a federal government level the red states are generally leaching off of the blue states.

Here is the proof:

http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/sr139.pdf (broken link)

The Tax Foundation - Federal Spending Received Per Dollar of Taxes Paid by State, 2005

TaxProf Blog: Red States Feed at Federal Trough, Blue States Supply the Feed
I think you can make those numbers say whatever you want. DC, Maryland, and Virginia obviously are high on the list by simple proximity. States with smaller populations and thus smaller economies will also be strongly influenced by any federal military or research presence.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-22-2010, 10:43 AM
 
Location: Chicago, IL
1,954 posts, read 4,505,596 times
Reputation: 1817
Quote:
Originally Posted by ric75 View Post
I think you can make those numbers say whatever you want. DC, Maryland, and Virginia obviously are high on the list by simple proximity. States with smaller populations and thus smaller economies will also be strongly influenced by any federal military or research presence.
No, these numbers are pretty straight forward. Federal dollars put in vs. federal dollars received is a pretty cut & dry concept.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RenaudFR View Post
OK I know that now : you never learned economics ! So ignorant !
Austin has a good infrastructure, low taxes and one of the lowest unemployment rate.
I understand people, they flee high-tax states, it's normal.California and NY are for rich only, the middle-class workers can't live correctly there : expensive housing, high unemployment rate (soon 13% in California), high taxes (too high).People are voting with their feets
NY and New Jersey do not have high unemployment rates. And Austin has crap infrastructure compared to cities in CA, NY, and NJ. Also, Austin has a large University and government employment base that helps it out during rough economic periods.

Last edited by 5Lakes; 12-22-2010 at 10:51 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-22-2010, 10:54 AM
 
2,755 posts, read 11,764,529 times
Reputation: 1464
Quote:
Originally Posted by 5Lakes View Post
What he is talking about is how blue states typically pay more into the federal government while red states typically receive more funding than they put in. On a federal government level the red states are generally leaching off of the blue states.
Wouldn't this be even more of a reason for people to run to the so-called "red" states?

I think there's a lot of factors going on here other than "red" versus "blue." Huge states like California and New York are, at least in recent years, "blue" but that's not really their defining characteristic. Both states are full of many millions of people, centers of corporate power and wealth, and residences of many of the very wealthy individuals in the country. Despite the middle class exodus to middle America these large coastal states will continue to be both wealthy and powerful, their fiscal problems notwithstanding. These states pay their billions to Albany/Sacramento and to Washington because that's where the money is. As long as the power structure in America continues to see value being located in these two states (and I think they mostly do), then they will pay the high taxes without complaint and in so doing allow the rest of us in the middle to "leach" off their success. (Although, sadly, my home state of Colorado, though in the middle, doesn't seem to come out very good in terms of federal dollars spent here).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-22-2010, 11:48 AM
 
370 posts, read 884,381 times
Reputation: 323
Quote:
Originally Posted by 5Lakes View Post
No, these numbers are pretty straight forward. Federal dollars put in vs. federal dollars received is a pretty cut & dry concept.
Sorry, but they aren't when you are trying to pretend that these states are being written checks directly by the federal government and are on some kind of welfare dole. The budget for one large military facility is enormous but do you think anyplace but the very nearby geographical area benefits from it? Military bases are almost completely self-sufficient and they don't pay taxes to the State and localities for the often valuable space they occupy. Like I said, you can make those number say whatever you want.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top