4 ms·

It's a little flimsy to ascribe causality in the headline

Ericson2314 7y ago
If they said "high cost of living" they would be a lot less wrong. I would expect the vast majority of people moving to lower expenditures to be paying far more in rent than taxes, and saving far more (in absolute terms) post move in rent than taxes.
JumpCrisscross 7y ago
Anecdotally, there is a link. SALT caps were the last straw for many high-income former New Yorkers. If you travel a lot for work and pleasure, it isn’t difficult to fall below the residency thresholds. You’re still paying tax for the time spent in e.g. New York or California. But the other income can be shifted to a lower-tax jurisdiction. I’m staying in New York. But there is a limit at which the tradeoff is worth it.
- bradleyjg 7y ago
  > If you travel a lot for work and pleasure, it isn’t difficult to fall below the residency thresholds. You’re still paying tax for the time spent in e.g. New York or California. But the other income can be shifted to a lower-tax jurisdiction. It's freeloading. Their lifestyles are possible because of high paying jobs in cities that invest to create conditions where such jobs can exist at all. (Same for the vaunted high paid remote workers.) They benefit from those investments but do not wish to contribute. This kind of defect cycle eventually leads to killing the goose that's laying the golden eggs.
  - JumpCrisscross 7y ago
    > It's freeloading Most of their productive lives are spent outside these cities. Once, they gained from those cities. But no longer. Today, the cities are bases for access to friends and leisure. The locals create zero incentive for value producers, from before or today, to stay. I say this as a proud New Yorker and Bay Area native.
    - bradleyjg 7y ago
      Maybe all your friends are in agriculture. Obviously I don't know. But most of the productive and dynamic sectors of the US economy (including tech and finance) could not exist without the network effects provided by our big, and big spending, cities. The people that make a living directly or indirectly in those sectors are benefiting from the investments made by New York and California. If they choose to live in rural Montana or the Cayman Islands while benefiting from the network effects provided by NYC and the Bay Area, that's freeloading. If all the world were the rural Montana or the Cayman Islands it would be a very poor world indeed.

If they said "high cost of living" they would be a lot less wrong. I would expect the vast majority of people moving to lower expenditures to be paying far more in rent than taxes, and saving far more (in absolute terms) post move in rent than taxes.

JumpCrisscross 7y ago

Anecdotally, there is a link. SALT caps were the last straw for many high-income former New Yorkers. If you travel a lot for work and pleasure, it isn’t difficult to fall below the residency thresholds. You’re still paying tax for the time spent in e.g. New York or California. But the other income can be shifted to a lower-tax jurisdiction. I’m staying in New York. But there is a limit at which the tradeoff is worth it.

bradleyjg 7y ago
> If you travel a lot for work and pleasure, it isn’t difficult to fall below the residency thresholds. You’re still paying tax for the time spent in e.g. New York or California. But the other income can be shifted to a lower-tax jurisdiction. It's freeloading. Their lifestyles are possible because of high paying jobs in cities that invest to create conditions where such jobs can exist at all. (Same for the vaunted high paid remote workers.) They benefit from those investments but do not wish to contribute. This kind of defect cycle eventually leads to killing the goose that's laying the golden eggs.
- JumpCrisscross 7y ago
  > It's freeloading Most of their productive lives are spent outside these cities. Once, they gained from those cities. But no longer. Today, the cities are bases for access to friends and leisure. The locals create zero incentive for value producers, from before or today, to stay. I say this as a proud New Yorker and Bay Area native.
  - bradleyjg 7y ago
    Maybe all your friends are in agriculture. Obviously I don't know. But most of the productive and dynamic sectors of the US economy (including tech and finance) could not exist without the network effects provided by our big, and big spending, cities. The people that make a living directly or indirectly in those sectors are benefiting from the investments made by New York and California. If they choose to live in rural Montana or the Cayman Islands while benefiting from the network effects provided by NYC and the Bay Area, that's freeloading. If all the world were the rural Montana or the Cayman Islands it would be a very poor world indeed.