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.
So, the highest gas taxes in the country along with our record property and income taxes just isn't enough? I don't think the problem is revenue unless you accept the status quo as 'normal'. It isn't.
I drove by a road construction project the other day. One guy working a machine and six guys standing around with their hands in their pockets. Address that needless and wasteful situation (times how many work sites across the state) and the transportation dollars already funded would go a lot further. I'm not saying that guy works alone - but five spectators (pardon me, safety observers!) is ridiculous.
Connecticut is a beautiful place with many advantages - but many people (myself included) are wondering if the constantly rising costs/taxes/fees/tolls justify the diminishing benefits of living here.
We do not have the highest gas taxes in the country and haven’t for several years now. We are not even in the Top 15. We are No. 16 and many of the state’s with higher gas taxes have tolls on their roads as well. Other states are investing heavily in their transportation infrastructure and raised their gas taxes to pay for it.
Connecticut has not raised its gas tax in 20 years. I’m sure you will agree that a dollar today buys significantly less than it did 20 years ago. The state cannot continue to ignore its infrastructure. If it does you are risking another Mianus River Bridge collapse. Is that what you want? Jay
Your comment on workers you see when you pass a construction site shows how little you know about construction. You do not know who was there or what they do or don’t do in the few seconds you see when you passed them. I can assure you it is not being wasteful.
A contractor hires workers and assigns them work by workday meaning they set up a crew and give them tasks that they can complete in the time available that day. You can’t give them more work than can be completed in a day and you can’t only hire them for a couple hours. This is true in ALL construction even when they work on your house. You may not like that but that is the way it has to work.
Good point on the high median incomes in all CT counties but does it really matter that the Yankee Group is a conservative organization? I'm more interested in if there claim is true (or not) and can separate the factual pieces from the opinion aspects. I'm contending that CT has a spending problem and is hiding some of that behind debt (what Yankee basically reported). Pretty sure that's still a true statement which highlights the state's challenge.
On population: the families are moving to somewhere, no? Utah is one such place I saw in the data, I didn't take the time to discover the others. Not all 50 states have a 'family drain' problem but most in the Northeast do (so I agree not exclusive to Connecticut by any means).
On disposable income: I'd really like to see that analysis if you come across it. I do not dispute it is difficult to arrive at a conclusion with high confidence given all the variables/factors between states and their various creative ways of taking your money. Overall tax burden in Connecticut is consistently ranked in top 3 (and usually #1 or #2) so not necessarily just an outcome of 'high income' (and particularly when you consider the aggregate tax view - Connecticut is on high side in income tax, sales tax, wholesale tax, property tax).
On education: I've lived in Connecticut since the mid-80's (so not a native). I've heard about the 'education crisis' since the day I moved here, and have heard politicians use that excuse over and over to 'help the children'. I'm not going to make any broad generalizations other than to say once again Connecticut taxpayers have not received a fair return on their substantial investments in my opinion. You do raise a good point about there being more opportunities now for a student who is motivated but on balance, I'm not sure either the State or the Professional Educators have delivered (but then, neither have many parents in the troubled areas). It's a tough situation and as you point out, not one exclusive to Connecticut.
Thanks for the reasonable and thoughtful dialogue Jay (and particularly with the lengthy post) - I do like Connecticut in many ways but have many concerns as I've watch the state deteriorate over the years. I'm not sure an effective solution is just another tax increase (whether it be tolls or anything else) but I'd almost be willing to bet that's exactly what will happen.
I pointed out the political bias of The Yankee Institute because it has a direct correlation on how they conduct their study and the conclusions they draw from it. As a conservative group their agenda is to lower taxes and reduce the size and expenditures of government. They do not care what that means or how it is done but by planting these seeds, they push their agenda as far as they can whether it’s accurate or not. I’ve pointed out the flaws in their study repeatedly here but we still get posters that just blindly believe what this group says.
Another thing that The Yankee Institute fails to acknowledge about Connecticut is the fact that we do not have county level government. Because of that the state must assume the costs associated with things counties do in other states. That includes things like law enforcement, secondary roads, regional planning, etc. it also includes the debt counties take on as well.
As I also noted I am not saying Connecticut does not have high taxes but they really are not as high as people are lead to believe. If you look at the link below you will see that Connecticut couples making $100,000 per year take home a little more than $79,000 per year. That’s better than some of the so called low tax states like Georgia, Delaware, Kentucky or New Hampshire. So tell me why those states are considered to have low taxes?
The northeast is the oldest and most densely populated part of the country. Connecticut is the fourth most densely populated state. Because of this there is not a lot of room for our state to grow likebthere is down south or out west. Of course more people are moving there. That said though it doesn’t mean people are fleeing our state like some contend.
Finally I will respectfully disagree with you about education and it’s value. As I noted Connecticut is consistently in the Top 5 for educating our children. What more do you want or expect? Our children are our future so their education should be of the utmost importance. You may not see the value of that but thankfully most people here do. Jay
I pointed out the political bias of The Yankee Institute because it has a direct correlation on how they conduct their study and the conclusions they draw from it. As a conservative group their agenda is to lower taxes and reduce the size and expenditures of government. They do not care what that means or how it is done but by planting these seeds, they push their agenda as far as they can whether it’s accurate or not. I’ve pointed out the flaws in their study repeatedly here but we still get posters that just blindly believe what this group says.
Another thing that The Yankee Institute fails to acknowledge about Connecticut is the fact that we do not have county level government. Because of that the state must assume the costs associated with things counties do in other states. That includes things like law enforcement, secondary roads, regional planning, etc. it also includes the debt counties take on as well.
As I also noted I am not saying Connecticut does not have high taxes but they really are not as high as people are lead to believe. If you look at the link below you will see that Connecticut couples making $100,000 per year take home a little more than $79,000 per year. That’s better than some of the so called low tax states like Georgia, Delaware, Kentucky or New Hampshire. So tell me why those states are considered to have low taxes?
The northeast is the oldest and most densely populated part of the country. Connecticut is the fourth most densely populated state. Because of this there is not a lot of room for our state to grow likebthere is down south or out west. Of course more people are moving there. That said though it doesn’t mean people are fleeing our state like some contend.
Finally I will respectfully disagree with you about education and it’s value. As I noted Connecticut is consistently in the Top 5 for educating our children. What more do you want or expect? Our children are our future so their education should be of the utmost importance. You may not see the value of that but thankfully most people here do. Jay
On debt: Forbes reports that CT is #3 in State debt nationally. That's a problem and particularly given Connecticut's small size. Is Forbes also hammering an agenda in this report? Rail all you want on the Yankee Institute but the spending addicts in Connecticut have borrowed both your and my children (assuming we stay here, of course) into a deep hole.
On taxes: the link you provided reports single tax rates ranging from 16% to 30%. Connecticut's is reported as 27%. I'm not sure what you mean 'not as high as people are lead to believe'. The reported 27% figure leads me to believe 'taxes are pretty high' given that 30% is the max tax rate reported.
On children: yes, they are our future and also why politicians shouldn't be borrowing their futures away from them today. The shrinking demographic in Connecticut is 34-54 yrs. and 0-18 yrs. as I shared last round and it's easy (at least for me) to connect the dots regarding 'why' that may be.
On education: I understand the value of good education, but if you are in a 'good' zip code you got a good education in CT. If you aren't your mileage has likely varied. In both cases spending has soared over the last 30 years. I think the Freakonomics work around the Chicago School System highlights some of the unique challenges the education topic brings into the discussion. Here's another take on that work from the Atlantic (who can be found right across the street from the Yankee Institute <haha>).
Thanks for your thoughtful response Jay - why I may not agree with you around some of these details I do appreciate the benefit of your perspective (and you've influenced me in some of your other informative posts as I've already mentioned). I'm also enjoying our reasonable conversation around our differences - those are harder and harder to find these days so I thank you for that too!!
This is my own personal situation but married, late 30’s, Hartford county, good income, have looked into the “hotspots for relocation” (Nashville, Raleigh, Austin) and can’t get my current house with .75 acres in a neighborhood for equivalent net spending (factoring in property taxes, house price, etc) within reasonable commute that isn’t atrocious for traffic. Not to mention my wife would likely have to take a pay cut for same job. If I didn’t live in CT, I wouldn’t move here if given a blank slate, but when all things are considered I have a high income and relatively low total costs for what I’m getting in a safe, nice town with very close airport access and relatively short drives to entertainment centers like casinos, Boston, NYC and Maine beaches (which I enjoy).
Land lock me or at least significantly further from oceans in those other places with sprawl, cookie cutter developments, traffic and overall minimal savings (maybe couple grand a year not counting possible salary cut), and for now CT is more than fine.
As stated, don’t mistake population growth with people leaving. We have a small dense state and not a super big amount of new construction. That’s what drives population growth, builders, land and new construction. We don’t have the space for that anyways.
We do not have the highest gas taxes in the country and haven’t for several years now. We are not even in the Top 15. We are No. 16 and many of the state’s with higher gas taxes have tolls on their roads as well. Other states are investing heavily in their transportation infrastructure and raised their gas taxes to pay for it.
Connecticut has not raised its gas tax in 20 years. I’m sure you will agree that a dollar today buys significantly less than it did 20 years ago. The state cannot continue to ignore its infrastructure. If it does you are risking another Mianus River Bridge collapse. Is that what you want? Jay
Your comment on workers you see when you pass a construction site shows how little you know about construction. You do not know who was there or what they do or don’t do in the few seconds you see when you passed them. I can assure you it is not being wasteful.
A contractor hires workers and assigns them work by workday meaning they set up a crew and give them tasks that they can complete in the time available that day. You can’t give them more work than can be completed in a day and you can’t only hire them for a couple hours. This is true in ALL construction even when they work on your house. You may not like that but that is the way it has to work.
On gas taxes: I stand corrected on the 'highest gas tax in country' comment, thank you. CT has raised just about every other tax in the past 20 years - and Lamont has proposed a $200M increase in gas taxes so stay tuned on that one! So - either pay more taxes or fear a bridge collapse when you get on the highway? Really?? Maybe some of the billions already collected should be dealing with that issue if it's imminent???
On gov't construction: the gov't construction biz is a dinosaur that's more interested in the resources it can consume vs. the products/outcomes it produces - it's a rent-seeking machine at scale. Being familiar with the Dept. of Transportation through extended family members working there taints me in this regard (and 'miss' on that personal attack around construction knowledge, sorry) but I do understand why my anecdote hasn't convinced you - I'm highlighting the state's chronic issues around construction contracting in general. So I do disagree with your assurances of 'no waste' (maybe you weren't considering the fraud/corruption/ethics aspects?) and hope for better accountability around state contracting practices to address those challenges.
On debt: Forbes reports that CT is #3 in State debt nationally. That's a problem and particularly given Connecticut's small size. Is Forbes also hammering an agenda in this report? Rail all you want on the Yankee Institute but the spending addicts in Connecticut have borrowed both your and my children (assuming we stay here, of course) into a deep hole.
On taxes: the link you provided reports single tax rates ranging from 16% to 30%. Connecticut's is reported as 27%. I'm not sure what you mean 'not as high as people are lead to believe'. The reported 27% figure leads me to believe 'taxes are pretty high' given that 30% is the max tax rate reported.
On children: yes, they are our future and also why politicians shouldn't be borrowing their futures away from them today. The shrinking demographic in Connecticut is 34-54 yrs. and 0-18 yrs. as I shared last round and it's easy (at least for me) to connect the dots regarding 'why' that may be.
On education: I understand the value of good education, but if you are in a 'good' zip code you got a good education in CT. If you aren't your mileage has likely varied. In both cases spending has soared over the last 30 years. I think the Freakonomics work around the Chicago School System highlights some of the unique challenges the education topic brings into the discussion. Here's another take on that work from the Atlantic (who can be found right across the street from the Yankee Institute <haha>).
Thanks for your thoughtful response Jay - why I may not agree with you around some of these details I do appreciate the benefit of your perspective (and you've influenced me in some of your other informative posts as I've already mentioned). I'm also enjoying our reasonable conversation around our differences - those are harder and harder to find these days so I thank you for that too!!
Of course Forbes has an agenda. They are a media outlet that focuses on business. They look at government as they look at businesses which is not the best way to look at it. Government is not a business and time and again it’s been shown that is not a fair analogy.
As I noted Connecticut does not have a county level of government so our residents don’t have the debt from them while residents in other states do. So if you look strictly at only the State Debt we are high but if you look at overall government debt, we would be much lower. Media outlets and Think Tank organizations don’t think of that in their simplistic analyses. In the past I have pointed this out to the authors of these types of studies and they were surprised and admitted that would make a difference. Still they haven’t changed their analysis or acknowledged the difference likely because it would make them look bad.
You are ore the that according to that article single filers in Connecticut pay a higher rate of approximately 27.12% but if you look at that list you will see that is true of most other states too. Connecticut’s Rate is lower than many states including Arkansas, California, Delaware, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, South Carolina, Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia and Wisconsin. That places us at No. 26th for taxes on singles. And look at some of those on that list above us. Arkansas? Georgia? Kentucky? New Hampshire? North Carolina? South Carolina? Aren’t these supposed to be low tax states? Why are they coming in higher?
As for education in our state I will respectfully disagree with your assessment. While yes, some towns do really great at educating kids. Middle of the road towns here do too. While some systems struggle, students in those towns are offered the opportunity to attend numerous Charter or Magnet schools if they want. They give a great education. That means that here in Connecticut students that want good education, have the opportunity to get it. I’m not sure that’s quite true in other states. That doesn’t come cheap but it’s worth it IMHO. Jay
On gas taxes: I stand corrected on the 'highest gas tax in country' comment, thank you. CT has raised just about every other tax in the past 20 years - and Lamont has proposed a $200M increase in gas taxes so stay tuned on that one! So - either pay more taxes or fear a bridge collapse when you get on the highway? Really?? Maybe some of the billions already collected should be dealing with that issue if it's imminent???
On gov't construction: the gov't construction biz is a dinosaur that's more interested in the resources it can consume vs. the products/outcomes it produces - it's a rent-seeking machine at scale. Being familiar with the Dept. of Transportation through extended family members working there taints me in this regard (and 'miss' on that personal attack around construction knowledge, sorry) but I do understand why my anecdote hasn't convinced you - I'm highlighting the state's chronic issues around construction contracting in general. So I do disagree with your assurances of 'no waste' (maybe you weren't considering the fraud/corruption/ethics aspects?) and hope for better accountability around state contracting practices to address those challenges.
Governor Lamont has NOT proposed an increase in the gas tax. The Republicans are claiming there will be an increase but NOTHING has been proposed. This is political pandering at its worst. They are playing to their base and their base are blindly falling for it. Until Lamont has actually proposed something, it’s just political maneuvering and nothing more.
Like many other states, Connecticut has tried various ways to build their projects. They have tried Public/Private Partnerships, Incentive Plans and Design Builds. These have led to mixed results at best. That means things such as lesser quality and durability, increased traffic delays, greater environmental impacts and delayed delivery. It’s a matter of opinion if these are worth a complete change or not.
Despite what you claim, there has been no clear better way to build projects. If there were, don’t you think other states would be seizing them more? It’s not only me that has not seen any clear benefits, even the Federal Government hasn’t found a better way and they have a lot of people who do nothing but look for ways to reduce project costs.
Accountability is a completely different subject. I can’t argue increased oversight isn’t needed. From what I’ve seen, it’s been handled well most of the time but there certainly have been problems in the past. Even the slightest bit of questionable actions warrants increased oversight so you are not wrong there. Jay
And unless Ned does something real about the juvenile crime epidemic pronto I will not be voting for him.
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.
