Middle class pays higher tax in Texas than California (San Francisco: low income, best cities)

[aslowdodge]

Originally Posted by JJonesIII

Must be some capacity issues. Every time I re-add them, it pulls one or two out. Maybe it's good now.

Working now, at least for me.

[JJonesIII]

Originally Posted by JesseD

The rich can live anywhere, the poor can live anywhere the rich pay for their public benefits (including a lower tax rate). The middle class as defined by the OMB can live in Austin or Sacramento at about the same costs. But the middle class will live at two/thirds the costs in Dallas or Houston as in Los Angeles or San Francisco.

TOTALS COSTS OF LIVING.

It's actually about 1/2 in comparison to San Francisco

[1AngryTaxPayer]

Originally Posted by expatCA

The retirement issue plays a large part, but remember that while TX property tax is higher than in CA, the cost of homes is less so less actual out of pocket costs in TX on average, so the actual amount paid is less. Prop 13 certainly helps homeowners in CA and was one of the best laws passed by .. the people.



I was just in Dallas and the number of homes starting at about $200,000.00 was surprising. New homes and nice ones.

The study is interesting from a statistical point of view, but over all the COL in CA is higher. Pay in most cases is better in CA, but in many TX is equal. The variance or regressive tax policy really comes down to if the poor and the next couple of levels are doing better in CA or TX.



Then while to percents of taxes in the 1st 3 groups is higher in TX, more people in those groups own a home than in CA, so it seem that they are better off even with a slightly higher tax, due to far lower COL and the lower home cost.

My Company pays everyone the same no matter what State so I can cash out here, move to the South and actually have money from my home sale to buy both my kids a house. That's nutz. That and the fact that gas is half price compared to here is also crazy. As soon as my youngest is out of HS we gone.

[earthisle]

Originally Posted by JJonesIII

Yawn. Now we go into "dodge" mode. Gee, I've never seen that before.

So let's reference back to post #45 to show that I did indeed give you my definition of middle class and gave you two links that document what is commonly used to describe Middle Class families. And from the 1st article...

"While some experts define the middle class by income, others define it by lifestyle. Still others say it's a state of mind."

They go on to describe the 5 most common attributes of a Middle Class Family: 1) Income, 2) Wealth (i.e property, investments, etc), 3) Consumption, 4) Aspirations, and 5) Demographics.

The 2nd article goes on to list the Middle Class in the range from $46,153 to $138,460.

To further document your disingenuous claim, this is the recent article based on HUD that is bandied about in the San Francisco forum....

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/28/fami...francisco.html

And let's remember that I believe at last claim, 85% of the families in San Francisco could not afford a median price home.

You used the term "Middle Class" instead of Middle Quintile to deceive and paint a narrative (it's as simple as that). Had you used the other term, most would have laughed and said but that's not necessarily the Middle Class since there is a significant difference in the cost of living between CA and TX.

In addition, let's look at how you started the whole conversation with your Straw Man argument....



The widespread belief is that there are no state taxes in Texas. Everyone knows property taxes are higher but most people who are not familiar with the area often claim it's 3% everywhere, and it's not (some areas are in the low 2% range). And no, most people cite that Texas is more "affordable" than California (and it is). And that would certainly be more the reason anyone would say it was better...not the disingenuous straw man that you are using.

I didn't see where you described how you define middle class. I disagree with that definition, because it's totally arbitrary.

The middle quintile of households is by definition the middle. If you want, you can expand that range outward, but you have to be looking at the actual middle of the population, otherwise you're just cherry picking some group that you believe is "middle class".

To put it another way, imagine the family with the exact median income for the whole state. Wouldn't you agree that such a family is in the middle class? Well such a family is smack dab in the middle of that middle quintile.

The Social Security Administration defines the middle class as the middle 3 quintiles https://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/popu...ficiaries.html



Would you agree to accept the SSA's definition?

[Taksan]

Originally Posted by earthisle

Would you agree to accept the SSA's definition?

Not in California....

[earthisle]

Originally Posted by Taksan

Not in California....

Location doesn't matter. This isn't a definition based on a fixed income range, it's the middle 3 quintiles regardless of what their incomes are which of course vary by location. It's also very broad. Only 1/5 the population is below this group, and 1/5 of the population is above this group.

[Taksan]

Originally Posted by earthisle

Location doesn't matter. This isn't a definition based on a fixed income range, it's the middle 3 quintiles regardless of what their incomes are which of course vary by location. It's also very broad. Only 1/5 the population is below this group, and 1/5 of the population is above this group.

Nope ... location matters

[JJonesIII]

Ahh...got it. I guess the j ig is up. And I don't care if you agree with the definition Earthisle. Most people I know define the Middle Class based on lifestyle. And seldom do people focus solely on income without taking into account the COL in a given location, or nonsense like middle quintile. Give us all a break!

[earthisle]

Originally Posted by JoeSmow

Of course location matters. And no Middle Class family I know would be living in a slum like the one pictured for LA or out in Vallejo in the Bay Area.

My wife and I moved from CA to Austin 1 1/2 years ago and love it here. We came to town without jobs and were gainfully employed within two months (and no, neither of us work in Tech). We only took a 30% haircut, and with the COL here at 50% of where we were from, essentially got a raise. We are both minorities and have found people here so much more welcoming than California. We rented first to make sure we liked it and will be buying a home this summer that is significantly nicer than our home in CA for 1/4 the cost (easy peasy).

I realize Earthisle you're not having a good go of it in Austin. But that's no reason to start up a misleading and dishonest thread like this one. Most Middle Class families I know that have moved to Austin from California have found it to be considerably easier financially. It is indeed about affordability.

If you don't like it in Texas and for some reason unbeknowst to me, think you can make a better go of it in CA, perhaps you should move there. I seriously doubt it will be more affordable though. And clearly, everyone doesn't agree with your viewpoint on Austin since it ranks #1 on many charts as the most desirable city to live in the country (well above any in California).

I don't know how I can explain this any more plainly.


The middle class pays less tax in California.

Very straightforward. That does not mean they have an easier time financially.

Taxes is one thing.

Taxes is the thing that is constantly cited as being too high in California and low in Texas.

Constantly here in Texas!

I don't really understand this pushback on simple stats. It seems to come down to both "But but but middle class is actually rich people only" or "But it doesn't matter because California is expensive".

Interesting because it does matter to the people selling the narrative that Texas is a low tax state.

[earthisle]

Originally Posted by JoeSmow

No, it's not. But as was already commented to you, it makes for a nice Straw Man. Affordability is what is cited. Sorry, you want to insist it's otherwise. No one in their right mind would care if their taxes went up a percent or two when the COL is 50% less. And as stated, in our case, with only a 30% haircut on income, we essentially got a raise (this is nothing more than simple math).

My wife and I knew our money would go further here and it has. Your whole thread is simply a moot point.

Here are some examples Texas low taxes being touted

https://www.forbes.com/sites/chuckde.../#4ba40c723c93

https://www.texaspolicy.com/californ...ans-call-home/

https://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/To...-67754197.html

https://www.cato.org/publications/ta...tate-migration