~Southern New England Demographic Update 2016 (2015) ~ (Boston, Worcester: fit in, house, job market)

[BostonBornMassMade]

Originally Posted by massnative71

I love it how median household income increased by 6.3%, yet housing prices seem to have increased by 70 or 80%... If things are so strong in MA, I would hate to see the rest of the country during this "recovery".

I also notice that while the total population has increased, the number of Whites has decreased. Where are they all moving to? Thank God for the Asians, who seem to more than make up for their losses.

Whites in general leave the Northeast due to high tax rates where the services seem to be allocated to low income people more than in other regions. In Southern New England (and NY/NJ) you may not see the benefits of your high tax rates if your well off. No gleaming new highways- no increase in services in you remote suburban towns like you see in the sub-developments in the south and west. Very little retail, just older and quainter and more reliant on Yankee ingenuity and do-it-your-selfism. In the 21st Century that has certainly lost some appeal.

Whites in Southern New England are older, wealthier, and with fewer kid than in other places. In-migration of immigrant whites is minimal and does nothing to offset these natural trends.

There is probably a decent amount of white in-migration into MA due to the jobs-but it is very likely there is none at all in CT or RI. Native MA whites are comparatively more less wealthy than native whites in CT and face a higher housing cost burden, thus they are also likely to move (NC, FL, VA, NH, DC, GA seem to be popular).

[missionhill]

MA seems to have done well in keeping the taxes reasonable in comparison to CT. Prop 2-1/2 has tamed the local taxes and state burden is better than CT and other high-cost blue states. Seems to me the housing cost in Greater Boston fuels out-migration more than any other factor, while the economy attracts people from outside for net growth. Good point about what people see or don't see in return for their taxes.

20 years ago it was obvious how much Boston and the immediate surroundings were getting from public investment-- the T line extensions/relocations of the 70s and 80s still felt new and the harbor cleanup and big dig projects were massive undertakings in progress. Now that's all taken for granted and what people notice is all the privately financed construction, and even wholly new areas like South Boston waterfront seem to come from private capital.

[BostonBornMassMade]

I think that was the point. To attract private investors into an area that had otherwise been deemed infrastructurally outdated and tax heavy and business unfriendly. The problem is that some of this or much of this private construction doesn't seem to be better than the public state sponsored projects. That is to say I structurally and designwise they are not a step up and they seem to have the less to do with the public good. Still I find Massachusetts infrastructure to be slightly better than Rhode Island and Connecticut's. I think the state should go for urban and pursue a line of development that builds the state out more like New Jersey (sans ugly manufacturing plants and refineries along the turnpike of course). Go for density-people want to move here. Build build build throughout the suburban communities and that needs to come from the governor down...Charlie Baker is a Republican. In terms of opening up towns, forcing town to accommodate growth and development, that would be a great republican move.

[tysmith95]

What this state needs is better public transportation.

Jersey should not be looked at as an example of good development. I don't want mass to become like Jersey. What I think we should focus on is building in the Urban core (inside of 128) and create better public transportation so that most of the Urban core uses transit and not cars.

Some European cities should be looked at as examples of good development.

[AtkinsonDan]

Originally Posted by BostonBornMassMade

I would assume CT continues to decline until their Governors' parties line up with the Presidents party...I am democrat but I do think both of those states need Republican Governors like Charlie Baker right now. Boston is doing really well but if you take out the immediate Boston area Mass. would have growth and economic stats more akin to CT and RI, i.e. declining/stagnating. Massachusetts could use a democratic governor to insure social equality.

Eventually I could see Mass pulling a CT-tremendous economic growth in CT in the 80s and into the 1990s that fueled growth and then it led to massive inequality (what Mass. is really starting to experience right about now). The cities became heavily minority (what many lesser and fringe Mass cities are experiencing right now) and the they never grew and adapted. This, I think put an onus on a more generous welfare and social services system, and led to higher taxes (think Mass.'s likely to pass 'millionaires tax'). The higher taxes, lack of public transit, allocation of services to the low income and Puritan-style New England laws made Connecticut unattractive to high-wage earner as well as young adult professionals.

Many years ago CT had no income tax which gave it a tremendous advantage of attracting wealthy people working in the NYC area. From this advantage among other things, it developed a good reputation. Good reputations are usually very hard to squander while bad reputations are very hard to overcome. RI has the bad reputation while CT has had to good reputation. I do lurk on the CT forum for its trainwreck value and CT is managing to squander its good reputation of yore. At this particular point in time I have more faith in RI improving than CT.

[BostonBornMassMade]

Originally Posted by tysmith95

What this state needs is better public transportation.

Jersey should not be looked at as an example of good development. I don't want mass to become like Jersey. What I think we should focus on is building in the Urban core (inside of 128) and create better public transportation so that most of the Urban core uses transit and not cars.

Some European cities should be looked at as examples of good development.

128 is already built, it would require mostly tearing down of small developments and rebuilding those same lots in a vertical fashion. If you meant inside 495 that'd make perfect sense. I see nothing wrong with the way Jersey is built out...comparatively modern highways, ample shopping, access to the Jersey shore, the Catskills and Poconos, Cape May, a surprising amout of farmland, Atlantic city (if thats your thing). Its led to high income, high educational achievement, and an overall quality of life very comparable to Massachusetts and it does so with a tremendous urban/suburban background. The state seems poised t grow and New Jersey has nearly 9 million people and present as a nice template. The natural feature and the foundation that makes MA, MA is here and wont go away...it will still be MA.

[Dm84]

Originally Posted by BostonBornMassMade

128 is already built, it would require mostly tearing down of small developments and rebuilding those same lots in a vertical fashion. If you meant inside 495 that'd make perfect sense. I see nothing wrong with the way Jersey is built out...comparatively modern highways, ample shopping, access to the Jersey shore, the Catskills and Poconos, Cape May, a surprising amout of farmland, Atlantic city (if thats your thing). Its led to high income, high educational achievement, and an overall quality of life very comparable to Massachusetts and it does so with a tremendous urban/suburban background. The state seems poised t grow and New Jersey has nearly 9 million people and present as a nice template. The natural feature and the foundation that makes MA, MA is here and wont go away...it will still be MA.

NJ is the next CT. The taxes are too high and people with the means to leave are doing so in pretty large numbers. The state has a lot of really impoverished cities for such a small state. Any place in NJ that people actually want to live in that is commutable to high paying jobs is obscenely expensive and people are growing tired of it. The traffic in North Jersey is horrendous as well and makes sitting on the Southeast Expressway or 128 a comparative dream.

[GeoffD]

Originally Posted by missionhill

MA seems to have done well in keeping the taxes reasonable in comparison to CT. Prop 2-1/2 has tamed the local taxes and state burden is better than CT and other high-cost blue states.

It's both Prop 2 1/2 and the state constitution that requires a flat income tax (modified last year with the new millionaire tax bracket). The middle class angry white men who call Howie Carr squeal at any mention of hiking the sales tax or state income tax and harass their state rep.

Massachusetts is only a high tax state because 495 real estate prices are so high. Even with Prop 2 1/2, you're still paying big taxes when your house is worth $1 million. If you make 6 figures in the lower real estate cost parts of the state, your tax burden is pretty much average nationally.

Compared to CT and RI, the Mass auto excise tax also isn't awful because it declines so quickly. CT and RI value your car on KBB "average" with "average miles". You're still paying big taxes on a 4 or 5 year old car where it's more of a nuisance tax in MA with a 5 year old car. My boat is a 1969 hull. I pay $25.00. I laugh when the town emails me the bill.

[Dm84]

Originally Posted by GeoffD

It's both Prop 2 1/2 and the state constitution that requires a flat income tax (modified last year with the new millionaire tax bracket). The middle class angry white men who call Howie Carr squeal at any mention of hiking the sales tax or state income tax and harass their state rep.

Massachusetts is only a high tax state because 495 real estate prices are so high. Even with Prop 2 1/2, you're still paying big taxes when your house is worth $1 million. If you make 6 figures in the lower real estate cost parts of the state, your tax burden is pretty much average nationally.

Compared to CT and RI, the Mass auto excise tax also isn't awful because it declines so quickly. CT and RI value your car on KBB "average" with "average miles". You're still paying big taxes on a 4 or 5 year old car where it's more of a nuisance tax in MA with a 5 year old car. My boat is a 1969 hull. I pay $25.00. I laugh when the town emails me the bill.

The excise tax is a scam. What annoys me the most is it punishes people for buying newer (usually more fuel efficient) cars.

[GeoffD]

Originally Posted by BostonBornMassMade

128 is already built, it would require mostly tearing down of small developments and rebuilding those same lots in a vertical fashion. If you meant inside 495 that'd make perfect sense.

I think the state needs to run light rail cantilevered over the median strip of 128. Have a master plan that the whole rail network is small trains and autonomous in 25 years. Express trains that stop at a 128 light rail station before heading in to the hubs at South Station, North Station, and Back Bay station.