Michigan CEO: Soul-Crushing Sprawl Killing Business

[Philip T]

Originally Posted by lh_newbie

I think this guy is off base, having moved from Michigan myself.

I didn't move from MI to TX because of the suburban sprawl. I moved because Michigan has cold winters and doesn't have interesting jobs in technology. While the Bay Area has incredible technology and amazing weather, it also has some of the highest taxes and cost of living in the country. I chose to move to Texas because it has affordable housing, strong technology jobs and low overall taxes, especially if you make above-average income and don't buy too much home (you can make choices to keep your taxes low by not buying an expensive home).

Most folks I know that have left Michigan, left because of the weather.

Michigan offers great hunting and some great boating, though it's a short season for it.

Well, yes, of course.

But you and I would know this . . . because . . . we would actually know what we were talking about on the topic rather than this flaming retarded agenda piece.

Am I missing something or is this really a claim of "Michigan CEO" status from a firm in Palo Alto? wtf? I am stupid or is this really as dumb as it all appears?

At any rate, anyone competent in this/these fields would have heard of the internets, and figured out maybe as long as a decade ago that it did/does not matter where one is based in many advanced technical fields -- especially something like patents, as you can do the work most anywhere and only stop in to visit with the clients, as needed -- which is often not at any "central office."

I have worked Palo Alto, and other Bay and California operations, Michigan, too, most of Texas, and plenty of the rest of the US, all based from the DFW region, while doing much of the work here, and sometimes just hanging out with Momma and the kids at vacation spots.

[Caleb0]

People move for opportunity (jobs), happier life and good schools. Detroit and Michigan are anti-buisness and have horrible winters (like someone already said). High crime rate. You name it.

Dallas has far more sprawl than Detroit or San Fran (which is one of the most dense cities in the US) and Dallas is where people are moving to, not from. Moving somewhere for art, museums, a city with a 'soul' is great but not practical for 90% of people who are trying to pay the bills and raise a family.

[skids929]

Originally Posted by Caleb0

People move for opprutunity (jobs), happier life and good schools. Detroit and Michigan are anti-buisness and have horrible winters (like someone already said). High crime rate. You name it.

Dallas has far more sprawl than Detroit or San Fran (which is one of the most dense cities in the US) and Dallas is where people are moving to, not from. Moving somewhere for art, museums, a city with a 'soul' is great but not practical for 90% of people who are trying to pay the bills and raise a family.

Well put..Michigan is an awful state (Detroit itself even moreso) to measure your own up to. Quite honestly, the two are at opposite ends of the economic spectrum. I live in a place where there is no suburban sprawl like in Texas, and we have our own set of issues. Every state is struggling to reorganize how they spend and budget, doesn't matter how strong the local economy is.

Anything for HP to strengthen the crusade against the burbs and why they are the problem with Dallas. Gimme a break...

[Caleb0]

^^ Agree. And yes everywhere has it's problems.

[Cowboys fan in Houston]

The CEO is way off base. If that were in any way true, all cities in Texas would be losing people fast. If you look at where DFW and Houston (for example) grew, it's overwhelmingly in the burbs. That's what most people want (in reality, not on CD) not density.

[BstYet2Be]

Originally Posted by ChristieP

I've had several employees relocate to DFW from Michigan, and they all left because of these reasons. Their jobs with the car companies got sent overseas and they couldn't find another job, they got sick of the cold winters, high taxes, etc.

What is the case in Detroit isn't the case here at all.

Exactly! Not only do they have to pay Michigan state tax, any employee that works in the City of Detroit (i.e., for example, for GM), also has to pay Detroit city tax... so not just one, but two deductions coming out of their paychecks each payday, along with two additional income tax forms they have to file annually... that Texans do NOT have to pay or file!

[BstYet2Be]

Originally Posted by BstYet2Be

Exactly! Not only do they have to pay Michigan state tax, any employee that works in the City of Detroit (i.e., for example, for GM), also has to pay Detroit city tax... so not just one, but two deductions coming out of their paychecks each payday, along with two additional income tax forms they have to file annually... that Texans do NOT have to pay or file!

Note that I did NOT say residents of Detroit... but employee employed IN Detroit... doesn't matter if they live in Detroit, another city in Michigan or another state even! Applies equally to both... highway robbery, if you ask me... and the first city I've ever heard of that collects city income tax from payrolls, in addition to federal and state income taxes.

[lh_newbie]

Originally Posted by BstYet2Be

... and the first city I've ever heard of that collects city income tax from payrolls, in addition to federal and state income taxes.

City Income Taxes - U.S. Cities With an Income Tax

Detroit is the mosted screwed up if you ask me. 1.25% for NON-residents and 2.5% for residents. Never heard of someone socking residents harder than non-residents. Talk about a disincentive to live within the city limits, no wonder Detroit is so screwed up.

Brian

[BstYet2Be]

Originally Posted by lh_newbie

City Income Taxes - U.S. Cities With an Income Tax

Detroit is the mosted screwed up if you ask me. 1.25% for NON-residents and 2.5% for residents. Never heard of someone socking residents harder than non-residents. Talk about a disincentive to live within the city limits, no wonder Detroit is so screwed up.

Brian

Thanks for the link, Brian. I had NO idea this "practice" was so wide-spread!

And, just look at D.C.:

District of Columbia: D.C. has a bracketed income tax system. The rates are 4% for the first $10,000 of income, 6% for $10,000 to $40,000 of income, and 8.5% for income over $40,000.

Unbelievable... sure hope this isn't a sign of things to come!

[DFWMike]

I'm one of those relatively young affluent people and I tend to love my sterile suburb, so the ops thesis must not be completely true. I'm also not conservative or religious, that kills a bunch of suburban stereotypes doesn't it? Btw, they may not be the norm, but there are others like myself in this fine community as well. The problem with Detroit, I believe is more about their city center than the sprawl. I do believe it is necessary for us, even way out here in Frisco, to help keep the city center strong. Because without it, there is no Frisco as can be attested by the suburbs surrounding Detroit. It's almost impossible for communities to remain prosperous while surrounding a wasteland of a city.