Disparity in population loss (Minneapolis, St. Paul: for sale, buy, sales tax)

[Chain of Lakes]

Originally Posted by Beenhere4ever

Could have been the evolution of taxes. Over in the west metro, lots of cities have higher sales taxes, partly due to actions of the Hennepin County board. The Ramsey County board did not emulate Hennepin County. So it could be the tax differential was smaller at the start, but as it grew, more people started looking east as a place to escape countywide tax decisions made in Hennepin.

Really? Why then does Hennepin county have 1.18 million residents and ramsey county 508k?

In addition, the median income in Hennepin county is significantly higher than ramsey county and Hennepin county has many more wealthy communities.

I just don't buy your thesis.

[golfgal]

Originally Posted by Chain of Lakes

Really? Why then does Hennepin county have 1.18 million residents and ramsey county 508k?

In addition, the median income in Hennepin county is significantly higher than ramsey county and Hennepin county has many more wealthy communities.

I just don't buy your thesis.

In 1950 ?

[spectre000]

Originally Posted by Chain of Lakes

Really? Why then does Hennepin county have 1.18 million residents and ramsey county 508k?

In addition, the median income in Hennepin county is significantly higher than ramsey county and Hennepin county has many more wealthy communities.

I just don't buy your thesis.

Lets remember Hennepin is much larger than Ramsey, 606 total sq miles (556 of it land). Ramsey is only 170 miles (155 land).

It's worth pointing out Ramsey is much more denser than Hennepin, 3,280 vs 2,050 people per sq mile. I think Ramsey is also the densest in all of Minnesota.

[Chain of Lakes]

Originally Posted by golfgal

In 1950 ?

I was specifically responding to one person's thesis that people moved to the east metro.

[xandrex]

Originally Posted by Beenhere4ever

Could have been the evolution of taxes. Over in the west metro, lots of cities have higher sales taxes, partly due to actions of the Hennepin County board. The Ramsey County board did not emulate Hennepin County. So it could be the tax differential was smaller at the start, but as it grew, more people started looking east as a place to escape countywide tax decisions made in Hennepin.

This seems pretty unlikely, given that the Twins Tax was about 50-some years away.

But honestly, have we ever seen a mass exodus to new city because one levied a slightly higher sales tax? I mean really, you would sell your house because of a fractional difference in the tax you pay? Anyone bothered by it could probably save the hassle of selling their house and buying a new one by simply shopping in the next city over.

[Beenhere4ever]

Originally Posted by xandrex

This seems pretty unlikely, given that the Twins Tax was about 50-some years away.

But honestly, have we ever seen a mass exodus to new city because one levied a slightly higher sales tax? I mean really, you would sell your house because of a fractional difference in the tax you pay? Anyone bothered by it could probably save the hassle of selling their house and buying a new one by simply shopping in the next city over.

Good points, if undiplomatically stated. But take it in a more complicated context. Crime goes up. Families require bigger houses. Many many factors encourage moving away from urban center. THEN comes the factor of people looking at different communities in all their complexity. Where are the good schools? Where are the affordable houses? Where are property taxes and sales taxes more favorable. It all feeds into a long process of pushing decisions one direction or the other. I won't go with a single-factorial explanation. But in a multi-factorial situation, I think taxes could matter. And again, there was a sequence of development. In that sequence, I'm pretty sure south and west were where Hennepin County residents moved first. Over time, the focus of developers began to fall on other directions like east and north. In this scenario, it makes sense to me that Minneapolis would lose residents more and earlier.

And, personal bias, St Paul is just a cooler town. Had classic Irish bars long before the fad caught on in Minneapolis.

I moved into town first when the Plymouth Avenue riots happened. Did St Paul EVER have a race riot.. Even when Rondo was being gutted to build a freeway? I was here, but frankly I don't remember any mass race action in St. Paul.

[Chain of Lakes]

Hold on. In your previous post you suggested that taxes in Hennepin county communities initiated movement to the east side of the twin cities. However, I see zero evidence of this.

You have now changed the subject and are now referencing a 1960s race riot and irish bars.

This is confusing and I don't understand your point.

[xandrex]

Originally Posted by Beenhere4ever

Good points, if undiplomatically stated. But take it in a more complicated context. Crime goes up. Families require bigger houses. Many many factors encourage moving away from urban center. THEN comes the factor of people looking at different communities in all their complexity. Where are the good schools? Where are the affordable houses? Where are property taxes and sales taxes more favorable. It all feeds into a long process of pushing decisions one direction or the other. I won't go with a single-factorial explanation. But in a multi-factorial situation, I think taxes could matter. And again, there was a sequence of development. In that sequence, I'm pretty sure south and west were where Hennepin County residents moved first. Over time, the focus of developers began to fall on other directions like east and north. In this scenario, it makes sense to me that Minneapolis would lose residents more and earlier.

And, personal bias, St Paul is just a cooler town. Had classic Irish bars long before the fad caught on in Minneapolis.

I moved into town first when the Plymouth Avenue riots happened. Did St Paul EVER have a race riot.. Even when Rondo was being gutted to build a freeway? I was here, but frankly I don't remember any mass race action in St. Paul.

I have no doubt that if you're comparing a variety of factors, the taxes could indeed come into effect. That said, I'm suspicious that it would be high on anyone's list. With food and clothing tax free, that's a significant savings that applies across the state. And I'd think things like property taxes come much more into play. I'm guessing someone in Minneapolis who mostly shops in Minneapolis is paying marginally more than someone in say, the Ramsey County suburbs, in sales tax.

I like Saint Paul, but are Irish bars really a fad? Certainly not with the younger crowd. They exist, of course, but I don't know anyone who specifically wants to go to them. I'd rather have a beer at Republic than some Irish bar, no matter the city!

[Beenhere4ever]

Originally Posted by xandrex

I have no doubt that if you're comparing a variety of factors, the taxes could indeed come into effect. That said, I'm suspicious that it would be high on anyone's list. With food and clothing tax free, that's a significant savings that applies across the state. And I'd think things like property taxes come much more into play. I'm guessing someone in Minneapolis who mostly shops in Minneapolis is paying marginally more than someone in say, the Ramsey County suburbs, in sales tax.

I like Saint Paul, but are Irish bars really a fad? Certainly not with the younger crowd. They exist, of course, but I don't know anyone who specifically wants to go to them. I'd rather have a beer at Republic than some Irish bar, no matter the city!

You're mistaken when you say "food and clothing tax free". I've run into many, many purchases of food that I was surprised to find were taxed. Dried banana slices. Orange juice. Didn't keep a list, but it educated me on the fact that the tax-free status of food is dotted with exceptions. Meanwhile I could buy a $300 pair of sneakers and not pay any tax. Crazy decisions made at state level. Beer could be called a "food" but the tax in Minneapolis is ridiculous. Sin tax, I guess. Nobody needs to drink beer. Especially if the city wants some project and can make drinkers pay for it. And I suppose that goes with no Sunday liquor sales. That's a funny one. We want to pick drinkers' pockets, but even that we won't do on Sunday in stores.
http://minneapolis.about.com/od/shop...issalestax.htm

[xandrex]

Originally Posted by Beenhere4ever

You're mistaken when you say "food and clothing tax free". I've run into many, many purchases of food that I was surprised to find were taxed. Dried banana slices. Orange juice. Didn't keep a list, but it educated me on the fact that the tax-free status of food is dotted with exceptions. Meanwhile I could buy a $300 pair of sneakers and not pay any tax. Crazy decisions made at state level. Beer could be called a "food" but the tax in Minneapolis is ridiculous. Sin tax, I guess. Nobody needs to drink beer. Especially if the city wants some project and can make drinkers pay for it. And I suppose that goes with no Sunday liquor sales. That's a funny one. We want to pick drinkers' pockets, but even that we won't do on Sunday in stores.
Sales Tax in Minneapolis

You've brought this tax point up before, but this seems to be an issue more with the retailer. There are so strange food exceptions, mostly around candy and any ready-to-eat food, but I can't recall ever being taxed on orange juice (exception again maybe going to a snack-sized drink at convenience store).

But even with the handful of items that occasionally seem to get taxed, saving approximately 8 percent on most food and clothing items is a savings and does insulate families who live in higher-tax areas.