[LIS123]

Originally Posted by Buzz123

A point made by a Northern Nevada politician on Ch-3 the other night (and I paraphrase) was that we have always had 'no', 'zero', 'zilch', corporate tax in Nevada. That is supposed to be a big incentive for businesses to relocate here. Actually I think it was originally, probably, a big incentive to not get kneecapped in the Mob days, but her point was, "How's that working for us?" It hasn't done much good. So maybe it's time to expect these big corporations like MGM, Harrah's, Stations, etc., to pay up. Just a thought. I'm no economist.

If your question is: 'Will RAISING TAXES will IMPROVE the LV Economy?' the answer is NO. That would weaken the LV Economy. Just b/c LV has low taxes and the Economy is currently weak, that doesn't mean that things would get better if taxes were raised. That's one of the main advantages that LV has, especially compared to California (which has a much more diverse Economy, better Universities and stronger labor pool). If LV eliminated one of its major advantages, how would that help? The answer is it wouldn't.

I'm not sure how this would happen, but LV needs to move towards diversifying its Economy. Nevada's (relatively) business-friendly climate is a BIG advantage over some of its peers.

[bay bridge]

As long as the unemployment stays at 15 percent more and more people will leave this area in search for work. Give it a couple more years and this town will be a ghost town!!!

[olecapt]

Originally Posted by bay bridge

As long as the unemployment stays at 15 percent more and more people will leave this area in search for work. Give it a couple more years and this town will be a ghost town!!!

That is of course a little silly. If lots of people leave I would think they will come from the unemployed or will provide jobs for the unemployed. That will inevitably lower the unemployment rate. When it gets low enough the flow reverses...if it ever needs to.

[radraja]

Originally Posted by olecapt

That is of course a little silly. If lots of people leave I would think they will come from the unemployed or will provide jobs for the unemployed. That will inevitably lower the unemployment rate. When it gets low enough the flow reverses...if it ever needs to.

Exactly. The people who have jobs and are successful here would have no incentive to leave. If the economy stays this bad, the people who leave will be the people who can't find jobs. So if anything, we'll look really good on paper if the unemployed flood out. Because then all that will remain are the employed.

As far as tax rates go, I'm surprised the state isn't doing more to bring businesses in. No corporate income tax is the big draw here. I know awhile ago they were (supposedly) running commercials in California to try to lure businesses to Nevada. Why isn't more effort being poured into that? I get that Nevada is a high risk state at the moment, but I'd wager to say that California's an even higher risk in the long run (I love CA, but would never want to own a business there...yikes!).

[radraja]

Originally Posted by Boompa

Las Vegas, Like Phoenix, Florida and parts of Southern California charged into the housing bubble headlong thinking that millions of baby boomers would come rushing there to retire. Well the boomers aren't coming and there are too many houses. Many of these places have 30% of the population involved in building and selling houses. You should expect them to start moving out.

But you must realize that the boomers are only just starting to trickle into retirement. Most of the boomers are still fairly young, many of them still working. Judging boomer retirement trends this early is quite premature. No one knows what will happen in the next 10, 15, 20 years.

Lets say that the average boomer was born in 1950 (just picking this number as an example) - that's only 60 years old. 60 is still very young in today's world. But in ten years when those same boomers are 70, it might be an entirely different story.

[tijlover]

I definitely wouldn't bank on retiring boomers to fill our overbuilt housing stock, or to take up the slack for those leaving.

I read the statistics in an AARP retirement magazine and I was, initially, shocked at the low percentage of retirees who are willing to uproot themselves and relocate to sunny climes. And I have to choke off a laugh when I read of how Mexico is preparing for an onslaught of American retirees.

Pretty hard for retirees to sever family and community ties, no matter how badly they're being clobbered with taxes elsewhere. I know that from my personal experience with retired family members back in the Midwest.

Now if one of their family members relocates out here, there's better hope of that happening. My retired Indiana neighbors just moved here. Why? Their son lives one block away, walking distance.

[Willy702]

Originally Posted by Buzz123

A point made by a Northern Nevada politician on Ch-3 the other night (and I paraphrase) was that we have always had 'no', 'zero', 'zilch', corporate tax in Nevada. That is supposed to be a big incentive for businesses to relocate here. Actually I think it was originally, probably, a big incentive to not get kneecapped in the Mob days, but her point was, "How's that working for us?" It hasn't done much good. So maybe it's time to expect these big corporations like MGM, Harrah's, Stations, etc., to pay up. Just a thought. I'm no economist.

The problem with the corporations not paying aren't really the casinos. While they could pay some more, they are already in the business which drives so much taxation and is so volatile to begin with. If there had been corporate taxes from them that would have been yet another revenue stream the government was counting on not coming in during the recession since most have been losing money on a tax basis for 2 years.

Most of the corporate tax proposals are more aimed at gaining revenue from banks and retail outlets. Home builders were also on the target list, but that has gone the way of casinos at least of late. The proposals have been very modest for the most part, but of course every business lobby is fighting them very hard. The only support they get is from a slice of the gaming industry which wants other industries to pay a share of the tax burden. The original proposal was for a tax which is about 1/3 the level of any neighboring state. The lobbyists fought it off basically arguing if you even start the tax it will chase off new businesses and inevitably it will rise. Pretty sorry arguments, but they worked and will continue to work.

[Willy702]

Originally Posted by radraja

But you must realize that the boomers are only just starting to trickle into retirement. Most of the boomers are still fairly young, many of them still working. Judging boomer retirement trends this early is quite premature. No one knows what will happen in the next 10, 15, 20 years.

Lets say that the average boomer was born in 1950 (just picking this number as an example) - that's only 60 years old. 60 is still very young in today's world. But in ten years when those same boomers are 70, it might be an entirely different story.

Retiree market was good many years ago, but I think both LV and Phoenix have kind of driven it away. People were moving because of the nature of the cities, but now that both are chasing business and working age residents more than retirees, even cheap real estate isn't enough to draw them like it used to. Plus the retiree market wasn't chased very hard, but now even cold weather cities like Madison try some soft marketing to keep them around or attract them. Seems to be working, college towns are booming as retirement destinations.

[Buzz123]

Originally Posted by LIS123

If your question is: 'Will RAISING TAXES will IMPROVE the LV Economy?' the answer is NO. That would weaken the LV Economy. Just b/c LV has low taxes and the Economy is currently weak, that doesn't mean that things would get better if taxes were raised. That's one of the main advantages that LV has, especially compared to California (which has a much more diverse Economy, better Universities and stronger labor pool). If LV eliminated one of its major advantages, how would that help? The answer is it wouldn't.

I'm not sure how this would happen, but LV needs to move towards diversifying its Economy. Nevada's (relatively) business-friendly climate is a BIG advantage over some of its peers.

Originally Posted by Willy702

The problem with the corporations not paying aren't really the casinos. While they could pay some more, they are already in the business which drives so much taxation and is so volatile to begin with. If there had been corporate taxes from them that would have been yet another revenue stream the government was counting on not coming in during the recession since most have been losing money on a tax basis for 2 years.

Most of the corporate tax proposals are more aimed at gaining revenue from banks and retail outlets. Home builders were also on the target list, but that has gone the way of casinos at least of late. The proposals have been very modest for the most part, but of course every business lobby is fighting them very hard. The only support they get is from a slice of the gaming industry which wants other industries to pay a share of the tax burden. The original proposal was for a tax which is about 1/3 the level of any neighboring state. The lobbyists fought it off basically arguing if you even start the tax it will chase off new businesses and inevitably it will rise. Pretty sorry arguments, but they worked and will continue to work.

I wasn't asking that or any other question. I was merely pointing out something I heard that makes sense. There has been a lot of discussion about diversifying the economy and enticing new businesses to set up shop in Nevada. I've heard this for going on 47 years, and I've heard all the arguments for why we can't seem to diversify, and for how we need to go about it. It's nothing new, but new or fairly new people on this forum talk about it like we Nevadans never thought about it before.

Whatever, it sometimes seems like our big ace in the hole has been the lack of corporate income tax that is supposed to cause corporations to fall all over themselves to come here. The point one State legislator was trying to make is that it has never worked. In the meantime, an objection we hear from outsiders all the time is how poorly funded our education system is here.

I don't know about corporate income tax, but casinos are corporations, and they pay taxes. But, as everyone knows by now, they pay only a small fraction of what casinos in other states pay, and that is because they own the law makers here.

If we are going to get the economy moving, there is a good argument around here that we need to provide a more educated work force, as well as all the other good that comes from our people having better educations. I have never believed that throwing money after a bad product will improve it, but let's say education needs more money to improve. I also don't like taxes, but for years having a business in Nevada has been almost a lock for making big profits. Maybe those that do should give at least a fair share back.

[lyra33]

Originally Posted by Buzz123

If we are going to get the economy moving, there is a good argument around here that we need to provide a more educated work force, as well as all the other good that comes from our people having better educations.

Exactly. I would fully support a top notch university especially if we run with renewable energy and become the leading source for that.