W Mass vs E Mass benefit from taxes paid (Boston: days on market, real estate)

[in_newengland]

Originally Posted by bolehboleh

I wouldn't imagine some items would be a bit lower but housing prices certainly are much lower out west.

Here's another example:

Boston (650K pop) $270million (70 fund) and $174Million (general fund)
Springfield (150K pop) $303 million (70 fund) and $35 million (general fund)

So Springfield receives more aid than Boston for the 70 fund and roughly 5X less from the general fund. Coincidentally, Boston is roughly 5X larger than Springfield.

Certainly Boston is the bigger city with more wealthy people, but it's certainly not free from the type of urban decay we see in many parts of Springfield.

So Boston, despite being bigger and wealthier than Springfield (which means they pay more in taxes), gets less back from the government for schools and roughly the same per person from the general fund.

I don't think it's fair to compare Boston to a dead city like Springfield. Most people wouldn't take a house in Springfield if it were given to them.

Compare places like Northampton or Longmeadow. Wilbraham or Hamden. This is where the middle class lives. House prices are quite a bit lower in these middle class WMass towns than in greater Boston. But the Boston area has done this to themselves by concentrating the wealth in one crowded area. Spread the wealth--there is plenty of talent in WMass but they end up moving to EMass or out of state for jobs.

[in_newengland]

https://www.zillow.com/northampton-ma/

Your housing money goes further in WMass but I wonder about utilities, groceries, etc. WMass doesn't have Market Basket btw.

It could be more expensive to buy a car in EMass. Is it?

[jayrandom]

I am a numbers guy, so here goes:

You can find the per capita income by county here. Nantucket leads the pack at $47,331, Hampden is last at $25,817.

We can estimate the per capita personal income tax by simply multiplying by 5.3%. This is a rough estimate, as there are lots of deductions, but there are also other sources of income. We can then multiply by the number of residents to get the total estimated tax contributions per county. Here is the list:

Nantucket $47,331 10,224 $25,647,343.63 0.20%
Norfolk $44,692 677,296 $1,604,294,780.10 12.81%
Middlesex $42,861 1,522,533 $3,458,636,206.39 27.63%
Barnstable $36,142 215,449 $412,698,161.17 3.30%
Plymouth $35,220 497,386 $928,450,550.76 7.42%
Essex $35,167 750,808 $1,399,394,241.61 11.18%
Dukes $33,363 16,739 $29,598,552.62 0.24%
Suffolk $32,835 735,701 $1,280,307,343.76 10.23%
Worcester $31,537 802,688 $1,341,661,687.17 10.72%
Hampshire $29,460 159,267 $248,676,308.46 1.99%
Berkshire $29,294 130,545 $202,681,817.19 1.62%
Franklin $29,259 71,408 $110,734,313.62 0.88%
Bristol $28,837 549,870 $840,399,863.07 6.71%
Hampden $25,817 465,144 $636,457,000.34 5.08%

Regions
Eastern Mass
61.84%
Western Mass
9.57%
Central Mass
10.72%
Southern Mass
17.87%
Boston CSA
89.99%


Eastern Mass is Suffolk, Norfok, Middlesex, and Essex counties,
Western Mass is Hampden, Franklin, Hampshire, and Berkshire
Central Mass is Worcester County
Southern Mass is Bristol, Plymouth, Dukes, Barnstable, and Nantucket counties

Considering that the Boston CSA includes Worcester, Bristol, Barnstable, and Plymouth counties as well as those already included as Eastern Mass, the Boston CSA makes up 90% of the tax revenues estimated in this way.

[timberline742]

Originally Posted by jayrandom

I am a numbers guy, so here goes:

You can find the per capita income by county here. Nantucket leads the pack at $47,331, Hampden is last at $25,817.

We can estimate the per capita personal income tax by simply multiplying by 5.3%. This is a rough estimate, as there are lots of deductions, but there are also other sources of income. We can then multiply by the number of residents to get the total estimated tax contributions per county. Here is the list:

Nantucket $47,331 10,224 $25,647,343.63 0.20%
Norfolk $44,692 677,296 $1,604,294,780.10 12.81%
Middlesex $42,861 1,522,533 $3,458,636,206.39 27.63%
Barnstable $36,142 215,449 $412,698,161.17 3.30%
Plymouth $35,220 497,386 $928,450,550.76 7.42%
Essex $35,167 750,808 $1,399,394,241.61 11.18%
Dukes $33,363 16,739 $29,598,552.62 0.24%
Suffolk $32,835 735,701 $1,280,307,343.76 10.23%
Worcester $31,537 802,688 $1,341,661,687.17 10.72%
Hampshire $29,460 159,267 $248,676,308.46 1.99%
Berkshire $29,294 130,545 $202,681,817.19 1.62%
Franklin $29,259 71,408 $110,734,313.62 0.88%
Bristol $28,837 549,870 $840,399,863.07 6.71%
Hampden $25,817 465,144 $636,457,000.34 5.08%

Regions
Eastern Mass
61.84%
Western Mass
9.57%
Central Mass
10.72%
Southern Mass
17.87%
Boston CSA
89.99%


Eastern Mass is Suffolk, Norfok, Middlesex, and Essex counties,
Western Mass is Hampden, Franklin, Hampshire, and Berkshire
Central Mass is Worcester County
Southern Mass is Bristol, Plymouth, Dukes, Barnstable, and Nantucket counties

Considering that the Boston CSA includes Worcester, Bristol, Barnstable, and Plymouth counties as well as those already included as Eastern Mass, the Boston CSA makes up 90% of the tax revenues estimated in this way.

This would skip businesses though, right?

[jayrandom]

Originally Posted by timberline742

This would skip businesses though, right?

Yes. Income tax accounts for about half of the total revenue. In the absence of other information, I think it's reasonable to assume that revenue from other sources is roughly proportional to that from income.

FY 2015 H 2 - Section 1A - Revenue by Source and Fund


in 2015 income was $14.0b. The next biggest source of revenue are sales taxes at about $6b, followed by corporate taxes at $2b. I would guess that the sales taxes might skew a little higher toward Western Mass, but corporate taxes a little higher toward the Boston CSA.

[in_newengland]

Originally Posted by jayrandom

I am a numbers guy, so here goes:

You can find the per capita income by county here. Nantucket leads the pack at $47,331, Hampden is last at $25,817.

We can estimate the per capita personal income tax by simply multiplying by 5.3%. This is a rough estimate, as there are lots of deductions, but there are also other sources of income. We can then multiply by the number of residents to get the total estimated tax contributions per county. Here is the list:

Nantucket $47,331 10,224 $25,647,343.63 0.20%
Norfolk $44,692 677,296 $1,604,294,780.10 12.81%
Middlesex $42,861 1,522,533 $3,458,636,206.39 27.63%
Barnstable $36,142 215,449 $412,698,161.17 3.30%
Plymouth $35,220 497,386 $928,450,550.76 7.42%
Essex $35,167 750,808 $1,399,394,241.61 11.18%
Dukes $33,363 16,739 $29,598,552.62 0.24%
Suffolk $32,835 735,701 $1,280,307,343.76 10.23%
Worcester $31,537 802,688 $1,341,661,687.17 10.72%
Hampshire $29,460 159,267 $248,676,308.46 1.99%
Berkshire $29,294 130,545 $202,681,817.19 1.62%
Franklin $29,259 71,408 $110,734,313.62 0.88%
Bristol $28,837 549,870 $840,399,863.07 6.71%
Hampden $25,817 465,144 $636,457,000.34 5.08%

Regions
Eastern Mass
61.84%
Western Mass
9.57%
Central Mass
10.72%
Southern Mass
17.87%
Boston CSA
89.99%


Eastern Mass is Suffolk, Norfok, Middlesex, and Essex counties,
Western Mass is Hampden, Franklin, Hampshire, and Berkshire
Central Mass is Worcester County
Southern Mass is Bristol, Plymouth, Dukes, Barnstable, and Nantucket counties

Considering that the Boston CSA includes Worcester, Bristol, Barnstable, and Plymouth counties as well as those already included as Eastern Mass, the Boston CSA makes up 90% of the tax revenues estimated in this way.

Good to see a numbers person!

But Hampden Cty numbers are skewed downwards by the dead city of Springfield where many people these days are probably illegals working under the table and not paying taxes, something like Lawrence. There are upscale suburbs surrounding Springfield though and they pay taxes. Franklin Cty is fairly poor and rural and it counts as part of WMass. Berkshire Cty is out in the Berkshires, not what we usually call the WMass region--and it is sparsely populated=not much tax revenue.

I guess it's the population that makes the difference in most cases? (except
Nantucket.) Boston area is congested with people. WMass is not as densely populated.

People in WMass don't have the opportunity to contribute more because they are stuck in a vicious cycle of few jobs>>>(especially with all the jobs lost due to Springfield being a no man's land now)>>>Boston not helping out even though we are part of the same state>>>continued declining or stagnate economy>>>few jobs>>>not enough people earning big money>>>no big tax revenue. There's a lot of talent in WMass and in one concentrated area there are FIVE colleges, three being Amherst College, Smith College, and Mt Holyoke, not to mention gigantic UMass. Do the graduates stay around? No. Many would like to but there are no jobs for them so they leave. Does Boston address this? No. Boston is for Boston.

Maybe what I'm trying to say is that WMass is capable of paying more revenue to Boston but something has to give. Like a bit of help from our state's capital city. Not handouts but startups--or something. The talent is there, the highly educated professionals, and if there were jobs, people would stay around and work.

[timberline742]

Where do you get that "Boston" is not "helping out"? Because Western MA is less dense, services cost more per capita to deliver, and the state totally subsidizes this (roads, infrastructure, services, everything...). The state invests in start ups, accelerators, infrastructure, education, etc in Western MA disproportionally to the population and the return.

[western mass and love it]

Springfield is not a dead city, or a no mans land. It has plenty of jobs , both white and blue collar. Also a lot of people in the lower valley work in the greater Hartford area. There are jobs, the PVTA is the 2nd most utilized public transportation system in the state and is also subsidized by the state.

As far as cost of living goes. Housing is cheaper for sure. Utilities are about dead even. Cost of vehicles is the same. Gas is the same across the state( I actually just paid less in Worcester than I usually pay in Springfield). Insurance varies by city and town and driving record.

Wmass definitely receives more back from the state than it gives. Has always been that way and will always be that way. The Springfield area actually gets the lions share of money in Wmass. But then again that's the population center of the region. Just like Boston getting the lions share of the pot. It goes to where the people are.

[GeoffD]

Originally Posted by Beachcomber4

Our town manager recently announced after a meeting on Beacon Hill that 40% of the state budget is for Mass Health. It would be interesting to see the cost per county on that.

Hmmm... The last time I looked, it was about 25%. 40% might include the 50% the Feds pay plus all the ACA expansion money the Feds pay. I think it's "only" 25% of state tax (income, sales, corporate) & fee revenue.

If you look at the aging Boomer numbers and realize that 30% of the Medicaid budget is paying for long term care for the elderly poor, that 25% number is going to spike over the next 20 years. If the Republican "Kill Obamacare" thing actually happens, it's going to be an epic budget crisis problem everywhere. 20% of all those Boomers are going to land in nursing homes and memory care facilities with Medicaid/Masshealth paying the bill. Unlike most elderly who land in a nursing home and die fairly quickly, those dementia patients tend to live many years with Medicaid picking up the tab for most.

[GeoffD]

Originally Posted by western mass and love it

Springfield is not a dead city, or a no mans land. It has plenty of jobs , both white and blue collar. Also a lot of people in the lower valley work in the greater Hartford area. There are jobs, the PVTA is the 2nd most utilized public transportation system in the state and is also subsidized by the state.

As far as cost of living goes. Housing is cheaper for sure. Utilities are about dead even. Cost of vehicles is the same. Gas is the same across the state( I actually just paid less in Worcester than I usually pay in Springfield). Insurance varies by city and town and driving record.

Wmass definitely receives more back from the state than it gives. Has always been that way and will always be that way. The Springfield area actually gets the lions share of money in Wmass. But then again that's the population center of the region. Just like Boston getting the lions share of the pot. It goes to where the people are.

The Springfield median household income is $34.7K. 69.2% of children live in single parent households which is 16th worst in the country. 11 of the 20 poorest schools in Massachusetts are in Springfield and Holyoke. It might not be a dead city but it's in the ICU and the priest is giving last rights.

I don't have any bright ideas for breaking the cycle of generational poverty but what we're doing now certainly isn't working.