4 ms·

No one in their right mind is moving from New York to Nevada. More likely, in fact much more likely, is that the double taxation policy that was carved out agai

No one in their right mind is moving from New York to Nevada. More likely, in fact much more likely, is that the double taxation policy that was carved out against high-tax-base states is corrected once Republican national losses continue to pile up. One can only hope that democrats remember how important it was to harm high-output states when they regain power and provide equivalent justice to the loaner states.

rayiner 8y ago
From 2010-2016, nearly a million people left the NYC metro area for other locations within the US: https://zicklin.baruch.cuny.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/02/Paper-Series-Feb.-2018-No.-15-New-Yorkers-on-the-Move.pdf https://zicklin.baruch.cuny.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/...
- ryanwaggoner 8y ago
  More context: The City of New York grew by over 362,000 residents between 2010 and 2016, a growth rate of 4.4% (Table 1). City officials consider this to be among the strongest periods of growth in the last half century (NYC Planning, 2017a). The population grew by 402,000 people through natural increase, and net foreign migration added an additional 500,000 residents. Net domestic migration was -524,000, as more people moved out of the city than moved in. If foreign and domestic migrants are consid- ered together, approximately one person moved out for every person that moved in. The greater NYMA has approximately 20.2 million people and grew by three percent during this period, adding over 586,000 residents. Approximately 672,000 people were added through natural increase while foreign migration added an additional 849,000. The metro lost 903,000 people from domestic out-migration. NYC is a major driver of the metro area’s population change; 62% of the metro’s net population growth occurred within the city. I don’t see the problem here.
  - ataturk 8y ago
    The problem is manifold--first off, the people leaving are the ones who had decent incomes and paid those high taxes. The influx is mostly all on the low end, meaning minimum wage or thereabouts. Do your own math--NYC wants to give everyone universal health insurance freebies. I don't see how that is even remotely sustainable with a huge population making median or lower than median income. It is already ridiculously expensive to live in NYC and most of the worker-bee underclass live on the margins, have hellish commutes, and basically exist like animals in substandard conditions that are just barely better than wherever it is they came from. It sucks being middle or lower middle class in NY, it is how I grew up and that was decades ago. With all the intervening inflation, it must really suck by now. In general, things aren't getting better for most inhabitants of the US, citizens and non-citizens alike. We are headed for 3rd World status where there is tiny, rich elite and everyone else is a low-wage debt slave running in place on a hamster wheel. We have to turn this around or it will be revolution for real--everyone is exhausted. Every stupid policy in the last 30 years has rewarded big business and done harm to middle class people.
jdhn 8y ago
>the double taxation policy that was carved out against high-tax-base states It's funny how the same liberals who call for higher taxes on the rich are so against capping a subsidy that primarily benefits rich people. If anything, the tax bill should've gone further and completely eliminated the mortgage and property tax deductions as these deductions primarily benefit the rich.
- arebop 8y ago
  You're confused; the parent comment and the article are primarily about the SALT deduction, not the home mortgage interest deduction. The main reason to mention "homebuyers" is that these taxpayers want to change their state of residence to lower their state income tax. It's funny how the same "conservatives" that claim to love small and local government enacted tax policy that blocks states from effectively moving tax revenue from the federal government to the state government.
  - zaroth 8y ago
    Stepping back from labels and left vs right dynamics, there have been a lot of words written about the new tax code just benefits the rich. Whether you think states should be able to claim an uncapped amount of income out from under the Fed, whether you think that this tax policy is more or less likely to encourage smaller/bigger Federal government, it is definitely true that this is a substantial tax increase for anyone holding a large net value of personal property. Note that rental property does not have the same limits, as the deduction against rental income is not capped.
    - awinder 8y ago
      Crucially, it’s not just about a large net property holding. It’s about having a a large percentage of your personal worth in property. If you’re making a lot in salary, or you’re passing down millions in wealth, you’ve been offset on the personal property tax and other components of SALT. If you’re in the top 20% and you’re not getting offset on higher tax bands, you’re not offset.

rayiner 8y ago

From 2010-2016, nearly a million people left the NYC metro area for other locations within the US: https://zicklin.baruch.cuny.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2018/02/Paper-Series-Feb.-2018-No.-15-New-Yorkers-on-the-Move.pdf https://zicklin.baruch.cuny.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/...

ryanwaggoner 8y ago
More context: The City of New York grew by over 362,000 residents between 2010 and 2016, a growth rate of 4.4% (Table 1). City officials consider this to be among the strongest periods of growth in the last half century (NYC Planning, 2017a). The population grew by 402,000 people through natural increase, and net foreign migration added an additional 500,000 residents. Net domestic migration was -524,000, as more people moved out of the city than moved in. If foreign and domestic migrants are consid- ered together, approximately one person moved out for every person that moved in. The greater NYMA has approximately 20.2 million people and grew by three percent during this period, adding over 586,000 residents. Approximately 672,000 people were added through natural increase while foreign migration added an additional 849,000. The metro lost 903,000 people from domestic out-migration. NYC is a major driver of the metro area’s population change; 62% of the metro’s net population growth occurred within the city. I don’t see the problem here.
- ataturk 8y ago
  The problem is manifold--first off, the people leaving are the ones who had decent incomes and paid those high taxes. The influx is mostly all on the low end, meaning minimum wage or thereabouts. Do your own math--NYC wants to give everyone universal health insurance freebies. I don't see how that is even remotely sustainable with a huge population making median or lower than median income. It is already ridiculously expensive to live in NYC and most of the worker-bee underclass live on the margins, have hellish commutes, and basically exist like animals in substandard conditions that are just barely better than wherever it is they came from. It sucks being middle or lower middle class in NY, it is how I grew up and that was decades ago. With all the intervening inflation, it must really suck by now. In general, things aren't getting better for most inhabitants of the US, citizens and non-citizens alike. We are headed for 3rd World status where there is tiny, rich elite and everyone else is a low-wage debt slave running in place on a hamster wheel. We have to turn this around or it will be revolution for real--everyone is exhausted. Every stupid policy in the last 30 years has rewarded big business and done harm to middle class people.

jdhn 8y ago

>the double taxation policy that was carved out against high-tax-base states It's funny how the same liberals who call for higher taxes on the rich are so against capping a subsidy that primarily benefits rich people. If anything, the tax bill should've gone further and completely eliminated the mortgage and property tax deductions as these deductions primarily benefit the rich.

arebop 8y ago
You're confused; the parent comment and the article are primarily about the SALT deduction, not the home mortgage interest deduction. The main reason to mention "homebuyers" is that these taxpayers want to change their state of residence to lower their state income tax. It's funny how the same "conservatives" that claim to love small and local government enacted tax policy that blocks states from effectively moving tax revenue from the federal government to the state government.
- zaroth 8y ago
  Stepping back from labels and left vs right dynamics, there have been a lot of words written about the new tax code just benefits the rich. Whether you think states should be able to claim an uncapped amount of income out from under the Fed, whether you think that this tax policy is more or less likely to encourage smaller/bigger Federal government, it is definitely true that this is a substantial tax increase for anyone holding a large net value of personal property. Note that rental property does not have the same limits, as the deduction against rental income is not capped.
  - awinder 8y ago
    Crucially, it’s not just about a large net property holding. It’s about having a a large percentage of your personal worth in property. If you’re making a lot in salary, or you’re passing down millions in wealth, you’ve been offset on the personal property tax and other components of SALT. If you’re in the top 20% and you’re not getting offset on higher tax bands, you’re not offset.