U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New York
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 07-19-2009, 10:39 AM
 
63,235 posts, read 88,740,266 times
Reputation: 13813

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Canerican View Post
I know, I get along with you most of the time. But any Jeffersonian would scoff at government run unemployment insurance, not to mention the expansion of it.



Absolutely, no party wants to be the one that contracted government to a useful size in NY, they all want to be the ones that expanded it.



I also agree, but I think that the proper way to do this is through charity (for the most part). You ever wonder why in the South smaller communities are so closely knit? Because there there is not so much government aid/welfare, so people actually help out strangers. Why? Because it's the right thing to do.

I'm not so naive as to think that charity can fix everything, but in NY they treat charity as though it can't do anything, and the only aid you can get is by making yourself more reliant on government, not your neighbors and peers.

No, we aren't the city of good neighbors, no anymore, at least. But we could but if the government just butted out, even just a bit.
It's interesting that you brought up charity. I'm all for faith based initiatives and such, but that alone can't replace the system. Think about it. If we totally got rid of "welfare", would people make up for the cost of such programs through charity? We complain about taxes. So, what makes us think we would make it up through charity alone? Here's more on this: Welfare can be replaced by charity

Also, if you notice, the South is probably the poorest region in the country. Actually, my father is from one of the poorest towns in the country and the region of the state he is from, the Mississippi Delta, is one of the poorest, if not the poorest in the country. Can't forget Appalachia too. Check this out: http://dcjobsource.com/richest.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lowest-..._United_States

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of..._United_States

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highest..._United_States

I will say that being poor in riches or material things doesn't mean one is necessarily poor in spirit.

Here's his hometown, btw: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zlc_92Tq1VE According to the 2000 Census, 49.4% of families and 54.4% of the the community lives under the poverty line.

Last edited by ckhthankgod; 07-19-2009 at 10:49 AM..
Rate this post positively

 
Old 07-19-2009, 11:57 AM
 
1,513 posts, read 3,014,477 times
Reputation: 448
I never said entirely, as you will see if you reread my post, that I explicitly stated that charity could take, most but not all burden from the government.
Rate this post positively
 
Old 07-19-2009, 12:05 PM
 
63,235 posts, read 88,740,266 times
Reputation: 13813
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canerican View Post
I never said entirely, as you will see if you reread my post, that I explicitly stated that charity could take, most but not all burden from the government.
Even if it is most, are people going to make up for what is lost or hold on to more if they can? That is tough to answer, but I think most would keep more if they could.
Rate this post positively
 
Old 07-19-2009, 01:11 PM
 
1,513 posts, read 3,014,477 times
Reputation: 448
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckhthankgod View Post
Even if it is most, are people going to make up for what is lost or hold on to more if they can?
It is a tough answer. We are the most generous nation in the world in terms of charity giving, no doubt a direct product of our Judeo-Christian foundation.

I think that many would give more if they had less confiscated by the government, through taxes.

One obvious solution is privatizing unemployment. It would probably cost the same, as if you make less, you require less, and if you work more, you require more, therefore pay more. You also have the option of not taking any, or very little. No big government intervention required, nothing lost to "the poor." Literally nothing would change, except less room for the government to screw things up and waste you hard earned money.
Rate this post positively
 
Old 07-19-2009, 02:33 PM
 
63,235 posts, read 88,740,266 times
Reputation: 13813
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canerican View Post
It is a tough answer. We are the most generous nation in the world in terms of charity giving, no doubt a direct product of our Judeo-Christian foundation.

I think that many would give more if they had less confiscated by the government, through taxes.

One obvious solution is privatizing unemployment. It would probably cost the same, as if you make less, you require less, and if you work more, you require more, therefore pay more. You also have the option of not taking any, or very little. No big government intervention required, nothing lost to "the poor." Literally nothing would change, except less room for the government to screw things up and waste you hard earned money.
What's interesting is that the "poor" actually gives a higher percentage of their pay to charity. Nation & World | America's poor are its most generous donors | Seattle Times Newspaper

I think some would be willing to give more, but many, if given the chance would keep more too. So, it would be interesting to see.

I also think the US is more charitable due to it's size and wealth too. Per capita, I'm not sure if the US is first. http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/ec...omic-aid-donor
Rate this post positively
 
Old 07-19-2009, 02:51 PM
 
1,513 posts, read 3,014,477 times
Reputation: 448
I knew the US was number per capita, but this will shed some more light on it... We are number 1 by a VERY long shot. No country even comes close to being as generous as the United States is.
Quote:
COUNTRY................PER CAP. GIVING

Spain..........................122
Belgium........................120
U.K............................117
Netherlands....................110
Ireland........................100
France..........................74
Finland.........................70
Austria.........................50
Germany.........................39
Hungary.........................32
Slovakia........................25
Czech Republic..................25
Romania..........................5

U.S............................278
This is something that I found on my way. Not surprising that Conservatives are more generous than Liberals though.
Quote:
24 of the top 25 states where people give an above average percent of their income were red states in the previous presidential election.

Conservatives give about 30 percent more than liberals, even though on average conservative-headed families make slightly less money.

People who believe the government does not have a basic responsibility to take care of the people who can't take care of themselves are 27 percent more likely to give to charity.

People at the lower end of the income scale give almost 30 percent more of their income than do those who make $1 million or more.

Religion is the single biggest predictor as to whether someone will be charitable. Religious people give to four times as much to charity, and not just to their own church but also to outside organizations and even explicitly non-religious charities.
The only place the US doesn't beat Europe in terms of charitable giving (per capita) is foreign aid, which if you believe in the Constitution, you should know that there is no basis for foreign aid anyway by the US government.
Rate this post positively
 
Old 07-19-2009, 03:04 PM
 
63,235 posts, read 88,740,266 times
Reputation: 13813
Here's another interesting blog: Marginal Revolution: How generous is the United States?

I noticed that it mentioned immigrants, but I wonder how many that send money back are actually legal?
Rate this post positively
 
Old 07-19-2009, 04:40 PM
 
1,513 posts, read 3,014,477 times
Reputation: 448
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckhthankgod View Post
I noticed that it mentioned immigrants, but I wonder how many that send money back are actually legal?
Thanks for the link, I read it, an interesting take, and it makes sense.

To me that isn't the key question, but I see what you mean, and it is directly related to your question: How much of the money being sent back to mexico has been taxed? Probably no way to ever find out.
Rate this post positively
 
Old 07-23-2009, 07:30 PM
 
Location: Texas
2,394 posts, read 3,611,864 times
Reputation: 1409
Quote:
Originally Posted by UpstaterInBklyn View Post
Some of the richest people in the world plus hundreds of thousands of 7-figure earners live here. NYC has had a 3.6% city income tax for years that apparently hasn't driven any of them away, because they are still here many years after the tax was enacted. There are reasons they stay here, despite the fact that they could move across the river to Jersey and avoid it. The elite stay here in NYC because it offers the kind of cultural and lifestyle amenities that they want, and don't mind paying for.
Ah, but how much are they willing to pay?

One way to think about it is the marginal effect of a tax rise. Few to no rich people are more likely to locate in NYC if taxes are higher; some number of people are less likely to locate or stay if the taxes are higher.

So the question is not whether everybody goes (that doesn't happen), but how many will go. The bigger the tax increase, the more who will hit the tipping point.

And, of course, the richer you are the more options you have.
Rate this post positively
 
Old 07-24-2009, 10:25 AM
 
63,235 posts, read 88,740,266 times
Reputation: 13813
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeadedWest View Post
Ah, but how much are they willing to pay?

One way to think about it is the marginal effect of a tax rise. Few to no rich people are more likely to locate in NYC if taxes are higher; some number of people are less likely to locate or stay if the taxes are higher.

So the question is not whether everybody goes (that doesn't happen), but how many will go. The bigger the tax increase, the more who will hit the tipping point.

And, of course, the richer you are the more options you have.
but what would they be running to? Other states tax people in different ways. For instance, in Virginia, they tax your vehicles. While the burden might not be as high, what about the quality you get from that smaller burden? What about issues with crime, which is higher in other regions and so on?
Rate this post positively
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.


Closed Thread



Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New York
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:07 PM.

© 2005-2020, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top