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 07-30-2012, 06:57 PM
 
Location: Michigan
4,571 posts, read 7,033,406 times
Reputation: 3599

Advertisements

Actually most Michiganders went to Phoenix, but that's sort of irrelevant to the property tax discussion.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-30-2012, 07:40 PM
 
40 posts, read 48,292 times
Reputation: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by animatedmartian View Post
Actually most Michiganders went to Phoenix, but that's sort of irrelevant to the property tax discussion.

Nah. Far more went to Chicagoland, but then moved back after a few years after experiencing Illinois taxes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-31-2012, 06:52 AM
 
3,008 posts, read 4,327,529 times
Reputation: 1524
Quote:
Originally Posted by WRosado View Post
The city of Columbus grew more than twice as fast as Indianapolis. Columbus' inner ring neighborhoods were growing faster than the suburbs, inner ring neighborhoods do not annex. You want to talk about annexation? Indianapolis is 361 square miles compared to Columbus' 217. Columbus is in the same boat as Charlotte or Austin, but even Columbus is smaller than them. Columbus still has plenty of suburbs in Franklin County like Upper Arlington, Dublin, Hilliard, Bexley, Westerville, Worthington, and more. Indianapolis takes up the majority of Marion County. Not to mention Franklin County is also growing faster than Marion County. Also, check out the Forbes thing as well, notice how more people are moving from Marion County to Franklin County?

Ohio's economy is doing better than all of its neighbors. It is on par with Pennsylvania. Ohio created the fourth highest amount of jobs in the country from June 2011-2012. Over 100,000 jobs were created in Ohio:

Table D. States with statistically significant employment changes from
June 2011 to June 2012, seasonally adjusted
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
| June | June | Over-the-year
State | 2011 | 2012(p) | change(p)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arizona.......................| 2,398,700 | 2,456,700 | 58,000
California....................| 14,047,600 | 14,326,700 | 279,100
Colorado......................| 2,250,800 | 2,284,400 | 33,600
Florida.......................| 7,260,400 | 7,331,300 | 70,900
Georgia.......................| 3,886,200 | 3,928,900 | 42,700
Idaho.........................| 603,800 | 616,100 | 12,300
Indiana.......................| 2,823,700 | 2,875,300 | 51,600
Iowa..........................| 1,470,800 | 1,491,400 | 20,600
Kansas........................| 1,328,000 | 1,343,900 | 15,900
Kentucky......................| 1,787,500 | 1,825,200 | 37,700
| | |
Louisiana.....................| 1,894,300 | 1,947,000 | 52,700
Maryland......................| 2,538,600 | 2,566,800 | 28,200
Massachusetts.................| 3,209,200 | 3,244,500 | 35,300
Michigan......................| 3,931,500 | 3,983,000 | 51,500
Minnesota.....................| 2,675,700 | 2,706,500 | 30,800
Nebraska......................| 943,300 | 958,400 | 15,100
New Jersey....................| 3,849,200 | 3,914,200 | 65,000
New York......................| 8,666,500 | 8,803,400 | 136,900
North Carolina................| 3,926,100 | 3,963,100 | 37,000
North Dakota..................| 393,300 | 419,000 | 25,700
| | |
Ohio..........................| 5,075,900 | 5,175,900 | 100,000
Oklahoma......................| 1,545,600 | 1,586,400 | 40,800
Oregon........................| 1,618,100 | 1,634,000 | 15,900
Pennsylvania..................| 5,692,500 | 5,729,700 | 37,200
Tennessee.....................| 2,641,400 | 2,683,200 | 41,800
Texas.........................| 10,551,900 | 10,783,700 | 231,800
Utah..........................| 1,203,200 | 1,234,500 | 31,300
Virginia......................| 3,675,000 | 3,724,400 | 49,400
Washington....................| 2,814,500 | 2,867,500 | 53,000
West Virginia.................| 746,500 | 757,100 | 10,600

Only four states with over 100,000 new jobs over the year.


Columbus, Cleveland, and Cincinnati each have lower unemployment rates than Indianapolis. Indiana is home to 6 fortune 500 companies, Ohio is home to 29 (we stole one from Kentucky last year). I will give Indiana credit, they have a stable credit rating, but so does Ohio, better than all of its surrounding states including Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Kentucky. Out of all of Ohio's neighbors, Ohio has the lowest unemployment rate. Ohio sits at 7.2%, Indiana at 8%. Indiana is the shinning star of the Midwest? I guess once again Ohio is considered Northeast. I was in Indianapolis not too long ago, I was not impressed. It had nice parts, but you over play it like there is no tomorrow. Get off your high horse, look up the facts, and stop basing your opinion as a fact. You look for any excuse to pride up Indiana and Indianapolis, and everyone on here calls you out for it. Columbus grew faster, is smaller in area than Indianapolis, and is more dense. You always make excuses. You bash Illinois and California, and know next to nothing about them. You're a broken record. You even laugh at Chicago's murder rate. Grow up!


"Detroit may be sinking down the toilet", but its economy is a hell of a lot more powerful than anything in Indiana.
WRosado, numbers say otherwise for overall growth as it was the fastest growing area in the Midwest followed by Columbus. The next ten years might be a different story but as of the 2000-2010, Indianapolis grew faster.

2nd, Ohio is a Midwestern state and has never been considered a NE state.

3rd, basing local economy on unemployment rate will be wrong every time. It's a rolling 30 day of filed claims highly influenced by seasonal changes such as construction periods. Basing off of your logic, Oklahoma would have a stronger economy than Ohio as well as Iowa and Nebraska plus the Dakotas. GDP is a much better indicator of how the local economy is doing. Just taking Indiana and Ohio, highest GDP (Gross) is Cleveland at 105,968 (in millions) followed by Indianapolis at 105,168, Cincy (100,000) and last CBus at 93000. The smallest MSA is Indianapolis so it shouldn't be second to Cleveland and just a tick behind at that. It sits at 12B over CBus (which is a very wide margin) and 5B over Cincy (passed it in GDP 3rd Quarter 2007 and never looked back). Once you factor in population differences with per capita, it isn't even close as Indianapolis only sits behind Minneapolis as far as major metros while the iowa metros and madison sit atop all of the midwest as far as local economies go followed by MSP and then Indianapolis. Do not confuse amount of fortune 500's with actual strength of economy. The two do not equal up. One is mere bragging rights as most Americans work for small/medium sized business which tends to be on the local level.

Ohio annexation laws will dictate if CBus is still able to annex. Something tells me though it is and it will. Irregardless, a city's boundaries are just that however large or small. Every citizen has the choice to live within said boundaries just as they have the choice to move outside of them. It amazes me how people try to parlay that as something valid. It isn't. You want more people living within your boundaries and pay taxes, do better than what you are! Unlike CBus, Indianapolis hasn't been able to annex since 1967. That's how long its been landlocked both politically and constitutionally as Indiana has a 5 mile buffer law between incorporated areas and only the state can forego that and the last time they did was to allow Merrillville to annex up to 53rd which is Gary's southern border to landlock the city after Hatcher was elected.

Broad does not live in Indianapolis. Indianapolis is not all of Marion County, definitely most, but not all. You have the excluded's and you have the included's (of which Indianapolis census population doesn't count). The included's retain some local control while Indianapolis the city has some control over the excluded's and everyone votes for Indianapolis mayor and common council even though the excluded's have their own mayors and councils. Which is why you can live in Acton or Wanamaker or Crows Nest

Indiana's credit rating is higher than Ohio's so I do not get how you fathom Ohio is doing better than all of its neighbors since Indiana is a neighbor. Indiana's budget runs rings around all of the midwest. It's one of but a few states with an actual surplus. Next budget might be a different story as states will be eating a lot due to the healthcare act and medicare and whether not to opt in or out. But as of right now fiscally speaking, Ohio and Indiana are on completely different levels.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-31-2012, 08:12 AM
 
4,800 posts, read 10,577,474 times
Reputation: 8290
Quote:
Originally Posted by KathrynAragon View Post
Without researching it, I wouldn't know. But as your point probably is, mine is that you can't go by property tax alone when looking at living expenses, though you certainly need to factor them in!

Here's a cool site that compares cost of living in different areas. You put in your area and your income and then choose another area to compare it to.
Moderator cut: link removed, linking to competitor sites is not allowed
Wow, that is cool. I checked out where I live near Bremerton, WA v. San Jose, CA. My 57,000/yr salary would have to be 133,000 in San Jose, CA. Won't be moving there any time soon.

Last edited by Yac; 08-02-2012 at 05:36 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-31-2012, 08:38 AM
 
56,609 posts, read 80,890,793 times
Reputation: 12505
Quote:
Originally Posted by kanhawk View Post
Wow, that is cool. I checked out where I live near Bremerton, WA v. San Jose, CA. My 57,000/yr salary would have to be 133,000 in San Jose, CA. Won't be moving there any time soon.
What about this one?Moderator cut: link removed, linking to competitor sites is not allowed

Last edited by Yac; 08-02-2012 at 05:15 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-31-2012, 12:08 PM
 
Location: Wonderland
44,758 posts, read 36,160,327 times
Reputation: 63395
Quote:
Originally Posted by GraniteStater View Post
Cost of living is an important factor, but I wouldn't move to many places just because they are cheap. I look at a plethora of other categories including availability of jobs, educational attainment, climate, conservation lands, etc.
Well, of course. But we are talking about costs - such as the cost of living, the cost of property taxes, etc. Hardly anyone would choose to live in a town ONLY because it was cheap!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-31-2012, 12:13 PM
 
Location: Wonderland
44,758 posts, read 36,160,327 times
Reputation: 63395
Quote:
Originally Posted by Archguy View Post
Neither would most people. In fact, the main reason they're cheap is that no one wants to live there.
That's a gross oversimplification.

Big, sprawling, crowded urban areas offer a lot of amenities, but require many people to sacrifice other things in return. For instance, a calmer pace of life, a larger more comfortable home or lot/acreage, privacy, open roads, smaller and more supportive schools - you name it.

No one picks a place to live JUST because it's cheaper - and everyone has their price limits they are willing to pay for amenities as well. It's a balance that each person and family have to determine that works best for them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-31-2012, 12:23 PM
 
11,172 posts, read 22,372,703 times
Reputation: 10924
Quote:
Originally Posted by meat123 View Post
Nah. Far more went to Chicagoland, but then moved back after a few years after experiencing Illinois taxes.
I would agree that most people leaving Michigan went to Chicago (like many midwestern states), although I really don't see them moving back to Michigan. Why on earth would they move because of taxes? Michigan and Illinois are almost the same on property, sales and income taxes. Less than 1% difference basically in rates.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-31-2012, 09:51 PM
 
Location: IN
20,848 posts, read 35,948,307 times
Reputation: 13292
Quote:
Originally Posted by KathrynAragon View Post
Well, of course. But we are talking about costs - such as the cost of living, the cost of property taxes, etc. Hardly anyone would choose to live in a town ONLY because it was cheap!
Ya, it is the right blend that usually works well. Most low cost areas with few jobs haven't seen any population growth while the vast majority of the job growth has gone to cities and suburbs with varying levels of overall cost.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-02-2012, 08:34 AM
 
Location: The Old Dominion
774 posts, read 1,423,308 times
Reputation: 1172
Quote:
Originally Posted by KathrynAragon View Post
That's a gross oversimplification.

Big, sprawling, crowded urban areas offer a lot of amenities, but require many people to sacrifice other things in return. For instance, a calmer pace of life, a larger more comfortable home or lot/acreage, privacy, open roads, smaller and more supportive schools - you name it.

No one picks a place to live JUST because it's cheaper - and everyone has their price limits they are willing to pay for amenities as well. It's a balance that each person and family have to determine that works best for them.
What you say is generally true, however it's irrelevant to the point.

The most expensive cities on the planet are expensive because lots of people want to live there.

This is incredibly basic and really shouldn't need repeating. A couple of people here (and I do not mean you Kathryn) need to take a course in basic economics. With a special emphasis on how prices are established in a market economy. Now of course, anyone with any degree of perspicacity can see that there are parochial concerns in this thread which override any attempts at logic.
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.
Similar Threads
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