Should Pittsburgh tax non-residents who work in the city? (Oklahoma: private schools, income)

[ferraris]

Originally Posted by caroline2

You can't manage to stay consistent about what your motive is for taxing suburbanites. Is it individuals covering their infrastructure costs, or is it redistribution?

I started this thread just asking what people thought about the tax, not with a concrete position. I said earlier that my preference is that you pay income tax where you work, and property tax where you live. That makes the most sense to me. The municipality that provides you with a job reaps a portion of the financial benefits you gain from having that job (which should be enough to cover most commuter's infrastructure costs). The municipality where you live recoups the cost of providing you with services and infrastructure.

[SlurmsMcKenzie]

Originally Posted by ferrarisnowday

I started this thread just asking what people thought about the tax, not with a concrete position. I said earlier that my preference is that you pay income tax where you work, and property tax where you live. That makes the most sense to me. The municipality that provides you with a job reaps a portion of the financial benefits you gain from having that job (which should be enough to cover most commuter's infrastructure costs). The municipality where you live recoups the cost of providing you with services and infrastructure.

Not a bad idea, but I cringe to think of the level of reform necessary at the state level to make this even remotely possible.

[ferraris]

Originally Posted by trlstreet

Not a bad idea, but I cringe to think of the level of reform necessary at the state level to make this even remotely possible.

Oh agreed. It would be a nightmare. Consolidation is much more likely, and would have the same effect for most people, since they would be working and living in the same municipality after a major consolidation.

[BrianTH]

I'm fine with that allocation of taxing jurisdictions, but I'd like to couple it with local property taxes not being the way we pay for schools.

[pman]

Originally Posted by ferrarisnowday

I started this thread just asking what people thought about the tax, not with a concrete position. I said earlier that my preference is that you pay income tax where you work, and property tax where you live. That makes the most sense to me. The municipality that provides you with a job reaps a portion of the financial benefits you gain from having that job (which should be enough to cover most commuter's infrastructure costs). The municipality where you live recoups the cost of providing you with services and infrastructure.

it doesn't have to be that theoretical, philadelphia does just that. the problem is it's very easy to avoid that tax. it tends to reduce the available workforce as people then ask to avoid city jobs...and possibly more damaging is that the ceo has to take a paycut to be in the city even if he lives in, say, mt lebanon thus making a financial bonus for him for moving the company outside city limits. I think the tax would have to be low if it weren't going to have a sizable negative affect. If you could levy a 1% tax (isn't this legal?) across the board, then you'd minimize motivation to move companies outside the city and also remove motivation to move outside the city even if you work there to save income taxes (though I think school quality is probably a bigger decision in this)

[BrianTH]

You'd have to work the numbers, but I am pretty sure the City could substantially close the wage tax gap under such a plan.

[bbrian12]

the city's answer to everything is to beat up the suburbanites for everything, pgh needs to get its house in order first b4 trying to gouge the surrounding areas to pay for there mistakes. i have no desire to live in the city. nor will i shop in the city or pay 10$ to 20$ to park anywhere in the city. nor would i ever send kids to the pathetic school system. my suburb wage tax is 1% the city is 3% my suburb is crime free and nice and clean. the city is nothing but a bunch of criminals (and a few decent people) and garbage form one end to the other. and as for the roads. my suburb plowes and fixes roads, the city does nothing. my suburb just expanded the high school and the city just closed a bunch and now have 40 to 50 kids in a classroom and only about 10 of them actually care about learning. my suburb has stayed the same for the last 50 years. the city has gone down the toilet for the last 50 years. so as for paying the city to spend money on b.s. i dont think so. ill stay in my suburb and watch the city turn more and more in to the ghetto it has become

[SammyKhalifa]

oh never mind. not worth it.

[chielgirl]

Originally Posted by Tinare

I'm impressed -- I can barely keep track of every move I make everyday let alone be confident about what 300 other people are doing.

I guess I'm lucky. I work in a field where changing/finding jobs has never been difficult for me. I've worked in the North Hills, Monroeville, Greensburg and downtown. I actually have changed jobs and made a conscious decision to work downtown because of the amenities. When I've worked in the burbs, I've missed the ability to take a walk at lunch (the places I worked had no outdoor space save for the parking lot), run to the library, Macy's, CVS, the bank, the farmer's market at Market Square on Thursday, the one at the City/County building on Friday, etc. and not have to jump in the car or deal with traffic. (You don't want to attempt that on either McKnight Road or Route 22 especially in November and December -- holy Christmas shopping congestion...) I like the summer time when bands play in US Steel Tower plaza and Market Square. I like the ability to meet friends after work for drinks and let rush hour happen without me.

I guess my experience includes more business lunches, socializing and errand running at lunch then yours does. But, since I do run around at lunch, I see a lot people out doing the same. Since I lack your ability to be certain about what everyone else is doing, I can only surmise that not all of those folks filling the streets of downtown between, say, noon and 2:00p.m. and walking in and out of establishments carrying bags and that I see sitting at restaurants are city residents. And that all of the people parking cars and paying parking taxes to the city are city residents or drinking in bars at happy hours are city residents or who attend theater events after work are city residents, etc. I mean the numbers would indicate that some suburbanites (albeit not your 300 co-workers unfortunately) are spending money downtown and enjoying what it has to offer. I can only assume that Oakland is similar.

And I live in the city too. But I support my neighborhood small businesses by patronizing them. I would think an aging hippie would do more of that, but what do I know. I don't have your laser-powered insight apparently.

When you've worked with the same people for decades, you pretty well know their patterns.
The occasional office xmas party or retirement might be the only time most go out, but in my place of business, it's certainly not the norm.
30-45 minutes doesn't give you much time for that.

It was a-ok for you to say that all of these suburbanites spend lots of $$ and time in the city and I express that your assertion is not my experience and you cop an attitude.
Great move. You're how old?

You continue to say that you live in the city, so you're not taking the bus or driving for 45 minutes to 1.5 hours to get home.
Do you work long hours and have a family to care for?

Insight is not a bad thing, one might try it sometime.

[ferraris]

my suburb wage tax is 1% the city is 3%

And how many hundred thousand people flock into your suburb each day without paying taxes? The city provides an environment that allows for many suburbanites to have a job, that is ground enough for those people to be paying city taxes in my view.

my suburb is crime free and nice and clean. the city is nothing but a bunch of criminals (and a few decent people)

Over generalize much? Maybe you should pay the city some taxes for keeping all of the degenerates and criminals out of your garden of eden.

and garbage form one end to the other. and as for the roads. my suburb plowes and fixes roads, the city does nothing

Garbage from one end to the other? I wonder if a lot of that is caused by the huge influx of non-resident workers? Maybe they should have to pay some taxes so it can be cleaned up? Oh and roads in disrepair? Hmm, I wonder how many non-resident cars drive on those roads each day? It would simply be too much to ask them to pay for that though.

In short, your position seems to be "The suburbs have become nice over the last 50 years by leeching off of the city, how dare the city try to stop that."