Columbus,Ohio better the Milwaukee,Wisconsin (live in, suburbs, rated)

[Kenozia]

Originally Posted by Rogee

It's interesting that you and your wife are artists, yet crime doesn't matter to you because of the suburb factor. Artists tend to gravitate to the city where the action and culture are.

That's a bit of the stereotype. Artists are not all 24 either. Most of the successful are older that have children and face the same desires for the safety and well-being of their family like any other suburban family. Driving 9-11 minutes downtown for a monthly gallery hop is no big deal. I don't have to live across the street from it just because I'm an artist.

Plus, every key major fashion and retail corporation in Columbus is actually located in the suburbs. So living downtown can generally be one of the longest and most hectic drives you could have for the key creative positions in the city.

[jlawrence01]

Originally Posted by Kenozia

• Much lower income tax rates (For someone making $40K, Milwaukee citizens pay 159% more in income taxes)
.

Ohio and Wisconsin state income taxes are fairly similar.

Columbus residents pay 2.5% LOCAL income taxes.

Milwaukee residents pay no local income taxes.

According to each city CAFRs (2006), Columbus collected $815 from each resident in local taxes; Milwaukee only $385.

Most Ohioans are in perpetual denial but in the last 30 years, Ohio went from being 32nd in total taxation to number 7.

[Milwaukee City]

Stats are stats just ask america where they rather live? C-Bus or Brew City and I think we know that answer.

Case Closed.

[Kenozia]

Originally Posted by jlawrence01

Ohio and Wisconsin state income taxes are fairly similar.

Ohio went from being 32nd in total taxation to number 7.

The 2.5% tax was due to a massive temporary hike that passed last fall due to the recession: halted police layoffs, library closings, etc. Prior to that the tax rate had not changed in 27 years.

But Ohio's state income taxes are definitely lower. In Wisconsin if your income range is between $19,401 and $145,460, your tax rate on every dollar of income earned is 6.5%.

In Ohio, someone making $20K would only pay 2.935%. Your median family making between $40-80K only pays 4.109% compared to 6.5% in Wisconsin. Even for the wealthy, someone making $200K a year, Wisconsin's income tax is 24% more.

Wisconsin Income Tax Rates - Wisconsin & other state tax rates information. WI tax calculator.
Ohio Income Tax Rates - Ohio & other state tax rates information. OH tax calculator.

And when it comes to property taxes, the median real estate property taxes paid for housing units with mortgages in Milwaukee is about 40% more: Columbus 1.6%, Milwaukee 2.2%.

//www.city-data.com/city/Columbus-Ohio.html
//www.city-data.com/city/Milwaukee-Wisconsin.html

Though you make a good point and I mentioned it in my earlier post, the corporate tax rates and taxes on business in Columbus compared to Milwaukee is extreme. Milwaukee pays WAY less in taxes. Ohio's rating on total taxation when Democratic Governor Taft took over in 1998 simply exploded. Yet, Columbus' economy has been growing far faster than Milwaukee in that time frame. Even in the recession, Columbus had 161% more job growth than Milwaukee. The Columbus business climate has been better despite the taxes because of it solid framework of job growth, variety (government, education, banking/insur, manuf), density of college graduates and lower cost of living.

[Jesse276]

Median Household Income

Highest-income metropolitan statistical areas in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

37 Milwaukee–Racine, WI CMSA 1,689,572 $46,132

57 Columbus, OH MSA 1,540,157 $44,782

[Kenozia]

Originally Posted by Jesse276

Median Household Income

Highest-income metropolitan statistical areas in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

37 Milwaukee–Racine, WI CMSA 1,689,572 $46,132

57 Columbus, OH MSA 1,540,157 $44,782

At this point it's becoming extraneous to compare the two because due to Columbus' recent rapid growth there are now multiple metro areas for Columbus and different sources pull different population numbers and data which can give a wide variety of stats. The BC numbers above aren't counting the CSA (Columbus-Marion-Chillicothe Consolidated area) that other sources use. The BC's Milwaukee metro area is counting 150,000 more people in the suburbs than Columbus even though the general CSA for Columbus has a higher population. Forbes named Columbus the 9th fastest growing city in the US, one of the only cities on the list not in the Sun Belt. It's a matter of time before the BC starts to finally include the CSA as their defined metro area.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Columbu...ropolitan_area

Bottomline, comparing city to city, Columbus is more:

Milwaukee–Racine, WI $36,578
Columbus, OH $44,011

Comparing metro to metro it's basically a wash.

But if your salary is the same in Milwaukee as it is in Columbus, would not the lower cost of living in Columbus be attractive?

From my experience, because over half of Milwaukee's economy is comprised of health care and manufacturing, if your occupation doesn't fit in those brackets you're most likely going to find more demand for your occupation and positions available with a higher median salary elsewhere.

[Jesse276]

More median household income data for 2010:

http://www.ffiec.gov/hmda/pdf/msa10inc.pdf

COLUMBUS, OH - 68600

MILWAUKEE-WAUKESHA-WEST ALLIS, WI - 71100


If someone has no intention of living in the city, as mentioned in a previous post... what's the point of only looking at the city only info?

Municipal boundary lines in the US are arbitrary anyway, they're incomparable. Metro data is the only way to make meaningful comparisons.

I'm not sure any one person's anecdotal experiences about an entire metro's jobs are accurate or meaningful. That's why when people make a claim, they provide some sort of data to back up their point.

[Milwaukee City]

Originally Posted by Kenozia

if your salary is the same in Milwaukee as it is in Columbus, would not the lower cost of living in Columbus be attractive

Nope b/c you would still have to live in Cbus. It's like if I could make 90K but live in topeka KS or make 80K and live in Chicago. I would still rather live in CHI.

[Kenozia]

Originally Posted by Milwaukee City

Nope b/c you would still have to live in Cbus. It's like if I could make 90K but live in topeka KS or make 80K and live in Chicago. I would still rather live in CHI.

Honestly I find it strange when people argue about the art "culture" of Milwaukee, Indianapolis, Columbus. As an artist, they're all about as a middle-of-the-road blip on the national radar that you could expect from a midwestern city IMO. All have enough to keep the locals occupied but is a bit much to stomach when hearing their locals describe their art scenes as "thriving" and "exciting". These people need to get out of the midwest.

[Jesse276]

Originally Posted by Kenozia

Honestly I find it strange when people argue about the art "culture" of Milwaukee, Indianapolis, Columbus. As an artist, they're all about as a middle-of-the-road blip on the national radar that you could expect from a midwestern city IMO. All have enough to keep the locals occupied but is a bit much to stomach when hearing their locals describe their art scenes as "thriving" and "exciting". These people need to get out of the midwest.

You make a good point in general, but it's all relative. If someone is coming from a small town where a 'night out' is either driving 45 minutes to Walmart or drinking till' their liver aches... then yes, a metro of 1-3 million really does provide a social and artistic atmosphere that is 'thriving' and 'exciting'.

The happy/sad truth is the greater connections between metros have resulted in a changing environment for talent. Instead of every city of a certain size having a scene... basically we end up with a couple world cities in the US having a real scene, with the remaining cities acting as talent incubators until that talent is 'discovered' and/or the talent moves to those larger cities to expand their careers. Basically, if your metro is outside those cities... it's a net consumer... with no real scene to speak of as you mentioned.

Here's a good article that sums up the idea... just insert art/culture/music/film for sports.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/26/bu...26excerpt.html