[JayCT]

Originally Posted by Pike320

That is: he wants the states who have done a better job fiscally to bail out Connecticut.

Connecticut has long been a donor state, meaning it sends significantly more to Washington than it gets back. By some measures we are the No. 1 Donor State. Many of those states people like to point to as doing well fiscally are taker states, meaning they take more than they give. Maybe it’s time Connecticut got back a little more than gives already. Jay

https://www.governing.com/week-in-fi...-get-back.html

[CTartist]

Originally Posted by JayCT

Connecticut has long been a donor state, meaning it sends significantly more to Washington than it gets back. By some measures we are the No. 1 Donor State. Many of those states people like to point to as doing well fiscally are taker states, meaning they take more than they give. Maybe it’s time Connecticut got back a little more than gives already. Jay

https://www.governing.com/week-in-fi...-get-back.html

Just so everyone can see this........

"Residents in Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Jersey and New York have some of the highest tax bills in the nation. They also pay thousands more in federal taxes than their state receives back in federal funding.

In total, 10 states are so-called donor states, meaning they pay more in taxes to the federal government than they receive back in funding for, say, Medicaid or public education. North Dakota, Illinois, New Hampshire, Washington state, Nebraska and Colorado round out the list.

Among the top four, the negative balance ranges from $1,792 per capita in New York to a whopping $4,000 in Connecticut, according to a new report by the Rockefeller Institute of Government."

[Pike320]

Originally Posted by JayCT

Connecticut has long been a donor state,

A while ago I researched that point. The vast majority of it is the geographic distribution of retirees and poor people. It’s not like the Feds are intentionally penalizing states they dislike. I’d like to see this argument ended for good.

Payments from Fed to State

The numbers for 2017 were:

A. Payments to individuals: $2,361B
1. Social Security payments (incl. disability); fed retirement payments, military retirement.
2. Medicare, unemployment, veteran medical payments
3. Assistance to students.
4. Housing assistance.
5. SNAP food expenditures.
6. Public assistance expenditures.

B. Grants: $674B
1. Medicaid: $375B
2. A long list of other smaller grants, many for disadvantaged and needy individuals.

C. Contracts and procurements: $502B

D. Wages (Federal employees and military): $260B

A is the vast majority of expenditures.

A and B are largely under nobody's direct control; it's just where people happen to live. Note that you "win" the non-retirement categories by having lots of poor people living in your state.

C is hard to generalize about. The DoD is responsible for more than half of that. A lot of it is where the major military facilities are; the military tends to prefer to have major training bases where winter doesn't disrupt the process too much, so southern/western states tend to get more. (Military retirees also tend to cluster around major bases, which affects category A expenditures as well.)

D depends on where military and civilian feds work.

[BobNJ1960]

Originally Posted by NUHuskies01

Covid plays a piece, but really ESPN is past its prime now. With every major sport having their own network, plus competition out there with Fox Sports and NBCSports and regional networks (NESN, YES), they end up having to throw more money at sporting rights, broadcasters, and "old athletes who can give their opinions".

Plus you also have to add in people cutting the cord with cable and not necessarily getting a package that includes ESPN, that is more lost revenue.

A fan of any of the major 4 sports, (or golf if that is your thing) is not going to go to ESPN for information about their league, they are going to head to that sports dedicated network.

Same thing with highlights. Who needs to watch Sports Center when you can check the internet and find what you are looking for instead of watching that for a hour wondering if they will show the game you are interested in? Or again, go to that sports dedicated network.

Everyone for years has been blaming the announcers politics, and now we have COVID for ESPN's demise. Really, its just been the model has changed, and the folks that own them have been unable to find a way to adapt. Capitalism folks. That is what has happened to ESPN.

I do agree, and expect ESPN to lose share every year, and shed more jobs every year.

[BobNJ1960]

Originally Posted by CTartist

To avoid a deep recession 'we need some sort of relief package': Connecticut governor.

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/t...193526759.html

Not happening. The states that locked down the most will simply need to right size their budgets to the reality they created.

Senate will properly not bail other people's decisions out.

[BobNJ1960]

Originally Posted by Pike320

That is: he wants the states who have done a better job fiscally to bail out Connecticut.

spot on

[CTartist]

Originally Posted by Pike320

A and B are largely under nobody's direct control; it's just where people happen to live. Note that you "win" the non-retirement categories by having lots of poor people living in your state.

1) Social security and Medicare is paid by the SS fund that people have been paying into their entire lives. That is not a federal goodie. And BTW a large % of working class and middle class Connecticut residents move down south upon retirement. The wealthy retirees have a house in CT and down south like a lot of my neighbors.

2) Are you implying CT has more poor people than most other states? You would be wrong.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/...-rate-by-state

States with the lowest poverty rates
#1 New Hampshire .........7.3%
#2 Utah.........................8.9%
#3 Minnesota................. 9.0%
#4 Maryland...................9.0%
#5 New Jersey................9.2%
#6 Colorado....................9.3%
#7 Hawaii.......................9.3%
#8 Massachusetts............9.4%
#9 Washington................9.8%
#10 Virginia....................9.9%
#11 Nebraska..................9.9%
#12 Connecticut...............10.00%
(item of note: CT will likely have a lower poverty rate when minimum wage hits $15 in 2022)
There is only 1.1% points that separate #2 UT from #12 CT

States with the highest poverty rates
#39 North Carolina ..........13.6%
#40 Texas.......................13.6%
#41 South Carolina...........13.8%
#42 Tennessee.................13.9%
#43 Oklahoma..................15.2%
#44 Alabama....................15.5%
#45 West Virginia..............16%
#46 Arkansas...................16.2%
#47 Kentucky....................16.35
#48 New Mexico................18.2%
#49 Louisiana....................19%
#50 Mississippi..................19.2%
(item of note: the bottom 12 are separated by 5.6% points)

I don't understand for the life of me how people can come on City-Data and make statements like the one above with any kind of facts.

What state are you from Pike?

*but now it's done....YEAH!

[Pike320]

Originally Posted by CTartist

1) Social security and Medicare is paid by the SS fund that people have been paying into their entire lives. That is not a federal goodie. And BTW a large % of working class and middle class Connecticut residents move down south upon retirement.

Maybe the tax rules that made retiring in CT undesirably costly should be considered here.

I did not imply CT has a lot of poor people; being a rich state, they just don’t get the poverty-related expenditures.

PS: There is no SS fund (in the sense of a dedicated amount of money) even though they talk as if it existed. Your SS and Medicare taxes just get dumped in with all the other government revenue.

[JayCT]

More good news for southeastern Connecticut. This will assure the continued expansion of jobs at Electric Boat. Jay

https://www.courant.com/business/hc-...mb4-story.html

[Pike320]

Originally Posted by CTartist;59617307[B

What state are you from Pike?[/b]

Nothing I wrote had anything to do with where I live. It was just facts about the distribution of federal money to people or entities in different states. If you read what I wrote, you can see that there is no grand conspiracy to steal money from CT and give it to a red state; it’s just how the distribution works.

But, since you asked:

• I moved to CT in 1998 and left in 2013.

• During that period (living in the same house throughout the the time) my property taxes doubled. The services my town provided stayed the same.

• During that period, I reached the age of 65 and determined that (not being wealthy) I could not afford to retire in CT. (This was based on the property and income tax laws at the time; I understand that CT has improved the income tax laws since then.)

• In 2013 I got a job offer in Texas for basically the same salary I earned in CT. By moving to Texas, my state income tax went to zero and my property taxes dropped by $2000 (for a house that was nicer than my CT house). Every year I worked in Texas I was thousands of dollars ahead of where I had been in CT. I retired in Texas in 2018 with a net worth that was significantly higher than than if I had stayed in CT.

• In Texas, when you reach the age of 65, your property taxes are frozen and do not ever increase as long as you live in the same house.

• I live in a small to medium city (college town) where there is excellent medical care; I am about an hour from Houston, where there is world-class medical care for any extremely serious disease.

• There are no annual car taxes in Texas.

Why do I still read this? Because my kids still live in CT so I have a stake in how things work out there.

If you have any other questions about my life, feel free to ask.