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.
I don't know what liar wrote this article, but I cant think of more than 3 people I know out of about 200 and something that are younger than 35 who want to live anywhere but within a city. And pretty soon, as they should, you're going to start getting charged what it costs to live as far out as you do (IE your utilities are going to go up and the cost of highways and roads out of the cities is going to go way up)
I think the population shift has a lot more to do with the COL than the taxes. Alabama taxes your income at a flat 5% and Illinois taxes all income at 5% (which should expire and drop down to 3.75%), but the COL is much higher in Illinois. Maryland has a lower tax rate than Kentucky or AR, but the COL is significantly higher.
COL state by state
Maybe the liberal states should have been colored red, since they bleed their citizens dry. I know, I live in Cali.
The South or South West, where the cost of living is lower and stranded of living is higher.
The COL is lower, but the standard of living is not necessarily higher since your income drops, poverty increases, the schools are worse, and the murder rate increases. That said, $100K will go farther in MS than MA, but you have to live in MS.
Chicago privatized parking meters which led to meter rates increasing by as much as 4X and led to complaints from merchants that their business suffered due to the increased rates.
I don't know what liar wrote this article, but I cant think of more than 3 people I know out of about 200 and something that are younger than 35 who want to live anywhere but within a city. And pretty soon, as they should, you're going to start getting charged what it costs to live as far out as you do (IE your utilities are going to go up and the cost of highways and roads out of the cities is going to go way up)
And that is a good thing?
"As they should" can not stand the idea of other not living as you want cant you?
The COL is lower, but the standard of living is not necessarily higher since your income drops, poverty increases, the schools are worse, and the murder rate increases. That said, $100K will go farther in MS than MA, but you have to live in MS.
Chicago privatized parking meters which led to meter rates increasing by as much as 4X and led to complaints from merchants that their business suffered due to the increased rates.
No, not MS why not Texas? Or Nevada, or Utah? Why not be honest,
I chose MS because it is the cheapest state, but the same could be said for NV, TX, AZ, TN, KY, FL, GA, SC, AL, AR, or any number of other states.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liberty Above All Else
but then again you are a leftist.
Ya, okay.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liberty Above All Else
That is by state, why not take it done to county levels?
That is much more time consuming, difficult to do, and doesn't change my overall point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liberty Above All Else
Troll roads with a elected completion or solely owned?
I'm not sure what you mean. There is always an option to take the public road unless you are going over a toll bridge or to an airport with no public access.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liberty Above All Else
That is Chicago, did anything thing that would not happen?
Raising rates is not limited to Chicago. The rates in Indianapolis increased after they privatized their system. I'm really not sure why you think Chicago should be an exception though. A private company was given management rights over the meters. Naturally, they raised rates, but they would have done the same no matter where they were located.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liberty Above All Else
Yes they could have, but why did they not have it done in house?
WI outsourced the work thinking it would save them money. After they conducted an audit they found 60% of the work would have been cheaper to do in house. Your claim that privatizing is always cheaper doesn't bear fruit.
Only problem is they move and vote for them same failed ideas and repeat the same failures as they did in the North East...They are like Locusts.
yep.
Just like section 8 housing. They love to prop up someone for it cause it makes em feel good like helping someone, as long as its in your neighborhood not theirs. A section 8 house where grass grows 4 foot tall, drugs are sold and 8 tenants live when only a single family is suppose to is ok as long as its away from their front window view.
I chose MS because it is the cheapest state, but the same could be said for NV, TX, AZ, TN, KY, FL, GA, SC, AL, AR, or any number of other states.
Ya, okay.
That is much more time consuming, difficult to do, and doesn't change my overall point.
I'm not sure what you mean. There is always an option to take the public road unless you are going over a toll bridge or to an airport with no public access.
Raising rates is not limited to Chicago. The rates in Indianapolis increased after they privatized their system. I'm really not sure why you think Chicago should be an exception though. A private company was given management rights over the meters. Naturally, they raised rates, but they would have done the same no matter where they were located.
WI outsourced the work thinking it would save them money. After they conducted an audit they found 60% of the work would have been cheaper to do in house. Your claim that privatizing is always cheaper doesn't bear fruit.
No, it proves it wrong..
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.