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.
Given the impact of Covid on the remote working dynamic, I could see a lot of more rural parts of NY get transplants that no longer need to be close to the city for their jobs.
Ever had 3-4+ hours of commuting a day and have it drop to almost nothing? Almost nobody wants to go back to that.
NYC brings in over 30 billion on tourism alone. That’s more more than Buffalo, Rochester, Albany and Syracuse combined, and that’s just tourism dollars, not entire revenue. Some of the taxes from those tourism dollars flow up.
A lot of that income is from financial gimmicky, money printing ponzi scheme. All that does is inflate the money supply, and devalue it. Dont need more of that.
As for tourism, most of the owners who benefit most from likely dont even live in NYC. Or they have multiple homes. Like Trump for example or the CEOs of Marriott, and Hilton. The employees that work in NYC hospitality industry and live in NYC are likely some Dominican Mamie or Pappies that is also on lots of welfare. The actors in the musical theatres are pretty poor. The owners of the production companies, or the theatres themselves dont likely live exclusively in NYC.
A lot of that income is from financial gimmicky, money printing ponzi scheme. All that does is inflate the money supply, and devalue it. Dont need more of that.
what
Quote:
As for tourism, most of the owners who benefit most from likely dont even live in NYC. Or they have multiple homes. Like Trump for example or the CEOs of Marriott, and Hilton. The employees that work in NYC hospitality industry and live in NYC are likely some Dominican Mamie or Pappies that is also on lots of welfare. The actors in the musical theatres are pretty poor. The owners of the production companies, or the theatres themselves dont likely live exclusively in NYC.
While this may be true in some cases, it’s still money that the city generates that places upstate benefit from. The myth that the state carries the city is just that, a myth, it’s downstate that carries upstate. I’m all for them leaving, I just wonder if they can afford to.
While this may be true in some cases, it’s still money that the city generates that places upstate benefit from. The myth that the state carries the city is just that, a myth, it’s downstate that carries upstate. I’m all for them leaving, I just wonder if they can afford to.
I stated before in previous post; the one crucial element especially for tourism is controlled by Upstate. That is the water
In a way NYC is doing what SoCal has done to Inyo County or those more northern and eastern Counties of California from whom they steal water from.
Only difference is the Northeast can never run out of water. But hopefully NYers upstate will be smart. If NYC, and Upstate separates, I hope Upstate charges the crap of NYC for the water. Then we will really see who leaches off whom.
In a way NYC is doing what SoCal has done to Inyo County or those more northern and eastern Counties of California from whom they steal water from.
Only difference is the Northeast can never run out of water. But hopefully NYers upstate will be smart. If NYC, and Upstate separates, I hope Upstate charges the crap of NYC for the water. Then we will really see who leaches off whom.
Well, that’s one far fetched goal to think about. I really don’t see them holding out on water to make up for the billions they would lose from separating. As it stands now, and almost always has - they leech off the city.
As far as California is concerned, it’s not the cities that use the most water, and they certainly don’t “steal it”. it’s a common misconception. Fact is, farms use the most water. Like the situation back east, LA, San Diego, San Francisco bring in ridiculous amounts of money, that benefits the entire state. I don’t see places like Humboldt county ready step up and replace all that revenue.
Well, that’s one far fetched goal to think about. I really don’t see them holding out on water to make up for the billions they would lose from separating. As it stands now, and almost always has - they leech off the city.
As far as California is concerned, it’s not the cities that use the most water, and they certainly don’t “steal it”. it’s a common misconception. Fact is, farms use the most water. Like the situation back east, LA, San Diego, San Francisco bring in ridiculous amounts of money, that benefits the entire state. I don’t see places like Humboldt county ready step up and replace all that revenue.
If they control the water, Upstate can make whatever tourist attractions it needs. What is attractive about NYC that cannot be replicated anywhere in the world literally? Restaurants, Theatres, even the skyscrapers, I am sure can be. Plus really how much money can those skyscrapers bring in? Plus people like seeing newer things, and even NYC does not really have that many interesting historic attractions.
California Water Wars were indeed originally about the growth of SoCal. Not exclusively though. Of course other players may have since increase their share of causing a burden.
I once saw this docu called Power And Water. It states that the water is being used up mostly by a handful of large corporate agribusiness. The owners who so happened to live in the metros. Such companies include the Wonderful companies and its owner Stew Resnick who lives in Beverly Hills.
He originally from NJ. His family moved to SoCal as part of the growth of that era. As for the smaller farmers that were likely there before Wonderful Companies, they only used as much as they could afford from what was available. Below is just a teaser.
If they control the water, Upstate can make whatever tourist attractions it needs. What is attractive about NYC that cannot be replicated anywhere in the world literally? Restaurants, Theatres, even the skyscrapers, I am sure can be. Plus really how much money can those skyscrapers bring in? Plus people like seeing newer things, and even NYC does not really have that many interesting historic attractions.
While anything is possible, upstate turning into a tourist Mecca that rivals New York City is pretty far out there. Possible yes, probable, I'm going to go with no. As far as NYC having that many interesting historic attractions, ehhh. 67 million visitors think otherwise.
Travel & tourism is a substantial and growing component of the New York State economy. Direct spending of $64.8 billion generated nearly $105 billion in total business sales including indirect and induced impacts. Over 780,000 jobs were sustained by tourism activity in 2016 with total income of $34.6 billion.
I just don't see upstate replicating this anytime soon. If they want to leave, I'm all for it, but I doubt the region is going to turn into a top 10 tourism destination overnight, things may actually be quite the opposite.
California Water Wars were indeed originally about the growth of SoCal. Not exclusively though. Of course other players may have since increase their share of causing a burden.
I once saw this docu called Power And Water. It states that the water is being used up mostly by a handful of large corporate agribusiness. The owners who so happened to live in the metros. Such companies include the Wonderful companies and its owner Stew Resnick who lives in Beverly Hills.
He originally from NJ. His family moved to SoCal as part of the growth of that era. As for the smaller farmers that were likely there before Wonderful Companies, they only used as much as they could afford from what was available. Below is just a teaser.
Yep. and this furthers my point concerning water usage. Where the people that own these companies live does not impact the regions that use the vast majority of the water, regions that are not LA, SD or SF (which many continue to believe).
NYC brings in over 30 billion on tourism alone. That’s more more than Buffalo, Rochester, Albany and Syracuse combined, and that’s just tourism dollars, not entire revenue. Some of the taxes from those tourism dollars flow up.
Interesting. Not that I’ve looked into it that much, but my sense was that the rest of the state was paying a fair sum to support the vast infrastructure needed in NYC. Probably nowhere more so than places like Long Island and Westchester County, but even less “important” places like Binghamton, Roc, Buffalo, Syracuse, etc. seem to have a bigger burden than comparable cities in states which lack an overwhelmingly dominant city or cities (CA and IL come to mind as similarly imbalanced).
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.
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.
