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.
Banks, other types of financial institutions, corporations, LLC's, etc.
Not 100% true, lots of overpaid government employees and contractors in VA.
Gross federal aid per capita, NY and SC:
NY $11,289.66
SC $11,742.43
SC is higher for a variety of reasons, main reason being the military bases, plus the Savannah River Project, and higher-than-averaga poverty levels in some rural areas.
I don't see any big difference in federal monies doled out to the states, per-capita, among the states. So what if NY sends, say, $450B to the feds every year, but gets about average back, per-capita,? It's not household income taxes that make the huge difference, it's corporate taxes for companies mainly in the NYC metro.
Tax filers in NY filing for a household get more back from the Treasury than, say, a household in SC and most of the other states, for obvious reasons. I'd be paying a lot more, probably roughly 3 times as much, in state and local taxes in NY if we still lived there, but NY households with the same income ours has get a lot more back from the federal government due to SALT deductions.
NY needs to get its act together, but it won't because of all of the special interests the state caters to.
Banks, other types of financial institutions, corporations, LLC's, etc.
Not 100% true, lots of overpaid government employees and contractors in VA.
Gross federal aid per capita, NY and SC:
NY $11,289.66
SC $11,742.43
SC is higher for a variety of reasons, main reason being the military bases, plus the Savannah River Project, and higher-than-averaga poverty levels in some rural areas.
I don't see any big difference in federal monies doled out to the states, per-capita, among the states. So what if NY sends, say, $450B to the feds every year, but gets about average back, per-capita,? It's not household income taxes that make the huge difference, it's corporate taxes for companies mainly in the NYC metro.
Tax filers in NY filing for a household get more back from the Treasury than, say, a household in SC and most of the other states, for obvious reasons. I'd be paying a lot more, probably roughly 3 times as much, in state and local taxes in NY if we still lived there, but NY households with the same income ours has get a lot more back from the federal government due to SALT deductions.
NY needs to get its act together, but it won't because of all of the special interests the state caters to.
Sure, it's organizations--organizations based in New York, often in New York City and its metropolitan area which needs investment in infrastructure to support this economic activity, but that money bled out to other places and not just New York State, but also Connecticut and New Jersey who are also massive net donor states.
SC is higher for a lot of reasons, military bases is a cute excuse since NYS has military bases (Camp Smith, Fort Drum, Fort Hamilton, Watervliet Arsenal, and maybe you've at least heard of West Point?). The Savannah River Project as in NYS doesn't have its own DOE sites? What kind of excuse is that? SC made its own choices and has its own sordid history, but why are we paying for that with such a massive gap between our ratio of federal spending versus federal revenue versus theirs? The absolute difference is $60 billion, but if we had a per capita net revenue like them on our 20 million or so people, the difference from what our absolute contributor amount would be something like $130 billion and that would be ridiculous.
Let's just say we're a net donor state and that's that and cut it down to a little less than 10% of the donation that we have now and get us a to a nice round number of $30 billion a year of federal spending over what we have now. We're still piling money in for other states, but at least it's manageable. It's not even asking for money back from deficit of earlier years or decades.
What does that do? Buffalo wants $1.4 billion for a light rail extension. The EIS for just higher speed rail putting Niagara Falls to NYC at top operating speeds at 125 mph with large sections passing freight rail for better on-time performance and much more frequent service, this was the top option after there was the established there is no money for anything faster (which I agree with if there is no concrete collaboration for service to Toronto or Montreal), with less than six hours from NYC to Niagara Falls and a five-hour ride to Buffalo, was topping out at about $15 billion. MTA thinks it needs $60 billion to completely revamp the subways and modernize downstate infrastructure, and to create a second set of tunnels under the Hudson, the cost was $20 billion to be split with New Jersey so that's $10 billion. These projects were split into many years, but let's say we're nice about it and say it's split into 5 years. $150 billion dollars is the deficit difference after five years as still a net donor state--that's still about another $60 billion to go with and let's say all of it goes towards a multitude of upstate projects so that federal spending tilts in favor of upstate.
Buffalo needs to do something about the skyway? Syracuse wants to bring back its OnTrack service and do something about its aging interstate cutting through its downtown? Rochester wants to revive its subway? All ****ing pittances in the budget. Spread it to various other things like smaller infrastructure projects, university and other institutional research with the hope of spin-off companies, and park services? You want to cap some of the below-grade freeways in Buffalo? You want to build out tracks so that trains headed westwards out of state also go through downtown Buffalo? You want to make a train service arc from Western NY that goes north after Schenectady to Montreal and Vermont and provides additional service in between? You want pre-clearance facilities for quick and speedy travel from Rochester and Buffalo to Canada's Golden Horseshoe? You want a split with a New Jersey that's also not paying through the nose on this federal revenue to spending ratio to be able to afford the Lackawanna Cut-off service that can bring rail service to Binghamton and other parts of the Southern Tier? You want passenger service on the west bank of the Hudson? You want to build electric transmission lines down the Mohawk and Hudson Valleys for cheap Quebecois hydro-electricity? Yea, sure. All of that. At that point, you'd have to be really trying hard to figure out what to do with that additional $60 billion accrued over 5 years of a reasonable ratio while still as a net donor state even after what are supposedly important projects for NYS--in which case, fine, give it back to the feds if we can't reasonably spend it all and let them redistribute it.
And all of that infrastructure improvement and spending throughout the state means what? Just the direct jobs alone where people and companies are spending within the state would mean state and municipal revenues go up as well as employment numbers and people on healthcare through their jobs, but more importantly for the long term, infrastructure is improved to serve as an economic multiplier for attracting or retaining more people and jobs. This isn't even South Carolina or nearly any other states's amount of received federal largesse picked from our pockets--this isn't even a deficit the feds would be running with NYS. We'd still be a massive overall donor state, but it at least isn't completely ridiculous.
NYS has been getting robbed for decades and the squabble within the state we hear most about is downstate dominating state affairs from upstate which is exaggerated, and downstate complaining about the net movement of state revenue to upstate which isn't all that much when all of that is scraps compared to what's happening to NYS on a federal level. You know what happens instead of getting even a slightly reasonable amount of federal spending? We get a small fraction of these improvements and we pay for it by having start and stop phases where we have to pay for that start-stop construction while trying to figure out funding sources and we back these things via bonds we have to do favorable returns on. Among that, the opportunity costs, and the state and municipal revenue we're missing out on from federal spending that states like South Carolina get, NYS instead gets annually, anally, fiscally fisted and on this forum all we get is a bunch of curmudgeons who've left already complaining about the scraps the state and its municipalities fight over like this dumb, bad but quaint $6 billion dollar state deficit.*
*note: I still think Cuomo is a conniving idiot, but he's an idiot so what he does is bupkis compared to the federal screwjob the state has gotten from the feds and other states for decades
Last edited by OyCrumbler; 12-30-2019 at 08:02 PM..
Sure, it's organizations--organizations based in New York, often in New York City and its metropolitan area which needs investment in infrastructure to support this economic activity, but that money bled out to other places and not just New York State, but also Connecticut and New Jersey who are also massive net donor states.
SC is higher for a lot of reasons, military bases is a cute excuse since NYS has military bases (Camp Smith, Fort Drum, Fort Hamilton, Watervliet Arsenal, and maybe you've at least heard of West Point?). The Savannah River Project as in NYS doesn't have its own DOE sites? What kind of excuse is that? SC made its own choices and has its own sordid history, but why are we paying for that with such a massive gap between our ratio of federal spending versus federal revenue versus theirs? The absolute difference is $60 billion, but if we had a per capita net revenue like them on our 20 million or so people, the difference from what our absolute contributor amount would be something like $130 billion and that would be ridiculous.
Let's just say we're a net donor state and that's that and cut it down to a little less than 10% of the donation that we have now and get us a to a nice round number of $30 billion a year of federal spending over what we have now. We're still piling money in for other states, but at least it's manageable. It's not even asking for money back from deficit of earlier years or decades.
What does that do? Buffalo wants $1.4 billion for a light rail extension. The EIS for just higher speed rail putting Niagara Falls to NYC at top operating speeds at 125 mph with large sections passing freight rail for better on-time performance and much more frequent service, this was the top option after there was the established there is no money for anything faster (which I agree with if there is no concrete collaboration for service to Toronto or Montreal), with less than six hours from NYC to Niagara Falls and a five-hour ride to Buffalo, was topping out at about $15 billion. MTA thinks it needs $60 billion to completely revamp the subways and modernize downstate infrastructure, and to create a second set of tunnels under the Hudson, the cost was $20 billion to be split with New Jersey so that's $10 billion. These projects were split into many years, but let's say we're nice about it and say it's split into 5 years. $150 billion dollars is the deficit difference after five years as still a net donor state--that's still about another $60 billion to go with and let's say all of it goes towards a multitude of upstate projects so that federal spending tilts in favor of upstate.
Buffalo needs to do something about the skyway? Syracuse wants to bring back its OnTrack service and do something about its aging interstate cutting through its downtown? Rochester wants to revive its subway? All ****ing pittances in the budget. Spread it to various other things like smaller infrastructure projects, university and other institutional research with the hope of spin-off companies, and park services? You want to cap some of the below-grade freeways in Buffalo? You want to build out tracks so that trains headed westwards out of state also go through downtown Buffalo? You want to make a train service arc from Western NY that goes north after Schenectady to Montreal and Vermont and provides additional service in between? You want pre-clearance facilities for quick and speedy travel from Rochester and Buffalo to Canada's Golden Horseshoe? You want a split with a New Jersey that's also not paying through the nose on this federal revenue to spending ratio to be able to afford the Lackawanna Cut-off service that can bring rail service to Binghamton and other parts of the Southern Tier? You want passenger service on the west bank of the Hudson? You want to build electric transmission lines down the Mohawk and Hudson Valleys for cheap Quebecois hydro-electricity? Yea, sure. All of that. At that point, you'd have to be really trying hard to figure out what to do with that additional $60 billion accrued over 5 years of a reasonable ratio while still as a net donor state even after what are supposedly important projects for NYS--in which case, fine, give it back to the feds if we can't reasonably spend it all and let them redistribute it.
And all of that infrastructure improvement and spending throughout the state means what? Just the direct jobs alone where people and companies are spending within the state would mean state and municipal revenues go up as well as employment numbers and people on healthcare through their jobs, but more importantly for the long term, infrastructure is improved to serve as an economic multiplier for attracting or retaining more people and jobs. This isn't even South Carolina or nearly any other states's amount of received federal largesse picked from our pockets--this isn't even a deficit the feds would be running with NYS. We'd still be a massive overall donor state, but it at least isn't completely ridiculous.
NYS has been getting robbed for decades and the squabble within the state we hear most about is downstate dominating state affairs from upstate which is exaggerated, and downstate complaining about the net movement of state revenue to upstate which isn't all that much when all of that is scraps compared to what's happening to NYS on a federal level. You know what happens instead of getting even a slightly reasonable amount of federal spending? We get a small fraction of these improvements and we pay for it by having start and stop phases where we have to pay for that start-stop construction while trying to figure out funding sources and we back these things via bonds we have to do favorable returns on. Among that, the opportunity costs, and the state and municipal revenue we're missing out on from federal spending that states like South Carolina get, NYS instead gets annually, anally, fiscally fisted and on this forum all we get is a bunch of curmudgeons who've left already complaining about the scraps the state and its municipalities fight over like this dumb, bad but quaint $6 billion dollar state deficit.*
*note: I still think Cuomo is a conniving idiot, but he's an idiot so what he does is bupkis compared to the federal screwjob the state has gotten from the feds and other states for decades
All fluff for the construction co's and their unions, with paybacks to the politicians, lobbyists, etc. The same as it's been in NY for decades.
Upstate is dead, has been for years and it will only get worse. Growing places will have a shot at transit and rail projects, not dying and dead metros across NY, add in the horrid climate and it makes economic sense to divert those monies to places where they will be used. Upstate is a political and economic backwater, any more.
All fluff for the construction co's and their unions, with paybacks to the politicians, lobbyists, etc. The same as it's been in NY for decades.
Upstate is dead, has been for years and it will only get worse. Growing places will have a shot at transit and rail projects, not dying and dead metros across NY, add in the horrid climate and it makes economic sense to divert those monies to places where they will be used. Upstate is a political and economic backwater, any more.
Could be worst. It could be that garbage strewn Greenville SC.
Upstate is dead, has been for years and it will only get worse.
Worse than dead? Wow.
So are the 8.4M people in Upstate NY not alive? Are babies not being born? Do millions of people not continue to live their lives there?
If in your mind it is dead, then maybe you need to just set aside your grief. It's time to move on.
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.
