Chef Jim Posted May 15, 2009 Share Posted May 15, 2009 Let's see, according to the info at the website provided by Lurker, the cost of living in St Augustine is 36% higher than in Rochester. If Tom moves to Boca Raton, the cost of living is 95% higher: http://www.bestplaces.net/col/?salary=5000...;city2=51207300 While Mr. Golisano may not care about the price of "a loaf of bread", I assume housing prices, and all other costs associated with, you know, living, impact his disposal income. And the difference is made up in saving on the income taxes. You forgot that little line item in your cost of living breakdown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted May 15, 2009 Share Posted May 15, 2009 And the difference is made up in saving on the income taxes. You forgot that little line item in your cost of living breakdown. From the numbers, the cost/savings look to be about even, in the factors other than housing. In other words, no net economic gain, if he already owns the house there. From my limited experience, I'd guess the differences between the two areas are even greater at the higher end of the categories. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted May 15, 2009 Share Posted May 15, 2009 In other words, you got nothin'. Other, than, of course, to use "liberal" as if it were an insult. I got nothin'? Your own link showed the only significant difference between the two states is Real Estate costs. That totally blows your "everything in Florida is way more expensive" bull sh-- totally out the window. Yeah, Real Estate is more expensive. Generally, that means there are more jobs, more opportunity, more reasons to be in that particular place. And I'm sorry that you and the rest of the lemmings can't face the fact that large entities are corrupt and will never provide the safety nets you dream about. It's called ideology for a reason, you poodle-headed freak. pathetic... ball-sucking... Look, two things you're actually an expert in. Stick with commenting on them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted May 15, 2009 Share Posted May 15, 2009 From the numbers, the cost/savings look to be about even, in the factors other than housing. In other words, no net economic gain, if he already owns the house there. From my limited experience, I'd guess the differences between the two areas are even greater at the higher end of the categories. Yeah, I'm sure that a guy bringing in about $50,000,000 a year in income won't at all enjoy saving $4,500,000.00 a year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acantha Posted May 15, 2009 Share Posted May 15, 2009 Yeah, I'm sure that a guy bringing in about $50,000,000 a year in income won't at all enjoy saving $4,500,000.00 a year. Sure, but when bread is $10,000 a loaf, what are you really saving? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HopsGuy Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 A certain NHL owner was reading this and nodding with approval... Here's the problem for states that want to pry more money out of the wallets of rich people. It never works because people, investment capital and businesses are mobile: They can leave tax-unfriendly states and move to tax-friendly states. WSJ Op-Ed President Reagan liked to quote one of the authors of this piece. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bills_fan Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 A certain NHL owner was reading this and nodding with approval... WSJ Op-Ed President Reagan liked to quote one of the authors of this piece. Fantastic piece. This about sums it up.... Updating some research from Richard Vedder of Ohio University, we found that from 1998 to 2007, more than 1,100 people every day including Sundays and holidays moved from the nine highest income-tax states such as California, New Jersey, New York and Ohio and relocated mostly to the nine tax-haven states with no income tax, including Florida, Nevada, New Hampshire and Texas. We also found that over these same years the no-income tax states created 89% more jobs and had 32% faster personal income growth than their high-tax counterparts. Did the greater prosperity in low-tax states happen by chance? Is it coincidence that the two highest tax-rate states in the nation, California and New York, have the biggest fiscal holes to repair? No. Dozens of academic studies -- old and new -- have found clear and irrefutable statistical evidence that high state and local taxes repel jobs and businesses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 Fantastic piece. This about sums it up.... There is simply no way to tax your way to prosperity. NYS voters are getting exactly what they deserve. Keep re-electing the incumbents, bitches. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bills_fan Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 There is simply no way to tax your way to prosperity. NYS voters are getting exactly what they deserve. Keep re-electing the incumbents, bitches. Agreed, but unfortunately, its not that simple. Both parties are beholden to big union interests and the minority parties are permitted to cross-endorse, which they often do. You have limited choices which often feel like the lesser of two evils. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts