4 ms·
> Raise taxes on them enough and they move to NJ or CT and it's actually a net loss for the city. Theoretically, increased taxes shouldn't affect the cost of l
by svantana 9y ago
> Raise taxes on them enough and they move to NJ or CT and it's actually a net loss for the city.
Theoretically, increased taxes shouldn't affect the cost of living, because the supply is fixed, and the market price is way above maintenance costs. The revenue will simply shift from the banks and landowners to the public. At least that's the theory, but it should work for a gradual tax increase.
- ordinaryperson 9y agoMoney for schools, roads, subways, police etc has to come from somewhere, and if high-income earners flee (because of being overtaxed) to nearby low-tax areas then taxes go up on everyone else to cover the shortfall, or services are cut. I favor a tax increase on the wealthy but I'm just saying implementing such a policy is more difficult than it sounds, especially because NJ and CT are so close by.
- murph-almighty 9y agoNot speaking for CT but the attractive locations in NJ are getting pricey fast- anywhere along a PATH stop has pretty high rent right now.
- svantana 9y agoThat makes no sense, high earners are the least sensitive to (fixed) costs and are more likely to choose location based on attractiveness. Who would move in if a high earner moved out? Supply and demand have a way of taking care of these things.