10 ms·

I live in NYC, and go the occasional reddit boards, and while some are worried that a lot of good jobs will leave, you also hear a lot of "good, let the gentrif

I live in NYC, and go the occasional reddit boards, and while some are worried that a lot of good jobs will leave, you also hear a lot of "good, let the gentrifiers leave" type of comments, After some digging, I realized that just 10% of the population pays about 71-72% of the taxes. If half of that 10% of the population leaves, the city will have 1/3rd less tax revenue (it will have less than 65% of the current revenue). Also, the city will be limited on what it can tax, as if it raises the taxes more, even more people will leave for low tax states and turn it into a death spiral. The only way to get out of the situation is to have help federally. Meanwhile it will have to cut services drastically.... from trash collection, social services, schools, etc... Apart from the slow trash decay, I think the first shock from some of the folks will be when MTA is forced to raise fares to $4 or $5 (now it is $2.75). As for those 'let the gentrifiers leave' populist folks, Sure, rents will go down by 15-20% but a lot of the folks will be jobless soon, and manny other things will get more expensive.

gridlockd 6y ago
NYC is probably worth more as a largely uninhabited speculative asset, a collector's item if you will. There will still be jobs for people to keep it in mint condition.
- api 6y ago
  That's Vancouver with all its absurdly overpriced uninhabited condo towers that exist only to be money laundering and parking vehicles.
spamizbad 6y ago
> After some digging, I realized that just 10% of the population pays about 71-72% of the taxes. Keep in mind you're talking about a local municipality which is going to receive a large chunk of its revenue from property taxes, fees, sales tax etc. From https://www.ibo.nyc.ny.us/iboreports/understandingthebudget.pdf https://www.ibo.nyc.ny.us/iboreports/understandingthebudget.... The breakdown is: 29% Property Tax 17% State Grants 13% Personal Income Tax 10% Federal Grants 8% General Sales Tax 8% Fees and Fines (Non-Tax) 7% Business Income Tax 4% RE Taxes 4% Other Taxes Some of these will hit the wealthy more than others (eg: Biz and Personal Income Taxes) but revenues aren't going to drop by 71-72%. I know in America taxes are super taboo but there's also nothing wrong with raising taxes on the rest of the city to cover any gap.
- throwaway0a5e 6y ago
  Or <gasp> reducing services to balance the budget. God forbid they only fill the potholes people complain about. Edit: the pothole was supposed to be a metaphor for something the city does but could do a lot less of without people actually being badly affected.
  - free_rms 6y ago
    The richest city on the planet can't afford to fill potholes?
  - gumby 6y ago
    people typically only complain about them when they have caused damage to their vehicle. lazy evaluation of maintenance is more expensive in the long run.
  - bilbo0s 6y ago
    That's the great thing about being NYC. That 10% of people funding everything are not the typical two or three hundred thousand a year guys that pay taxes in other cities. They are billionaires, most of whom are not even in real estate, who own skyscrapers, or the leases, all over Manhattan. Oftentimes just for vanity, or even just bragging rights over their wife's brother's skyscrapers. (I'm serious. This happened, I was there. And it was at that point I decided some people just had too much money.) When money like that is available to a city, you end up with infrastructure projects of the scale NYC has, the ability to tell your state "thanks but no thanks", Oh, and police departments with intelligence units that outstrip the capabilities of the intelligence apparatus in most Asian and South American nations. The average american has no frame of reference for the kind of wealth at the disposal of NYC. I say, let them fix all the potholes. Regular people may as well get something out of it.
- robocat 6y ago
  The highest earning 1 percent of New York City residents generated 43 percent of city income taxes From (biased but presumably factual): https://www.empirecenter.org/publications/nycs-high-income-tax-habit/ https://www.empirecenter.org/publications/nycs-high-income-t... Edit: just trying to add info, not bias the conversation! Maybe also relevant: https://www.visualcapitalist.com/3d-map-the-u-s-cities-with-the-highest-economic-output/ https://www.visualcapitalist.com/3d-map-the-u-s-cities-with-...
zanny 6y ago
This is why local politics is generally defanged and powerless. Ultimately you cannot make much meaningful change on the local or state level that is hostile to capitals interests. If what you do is anti-business, even if its in the interests of your actual voting residents, the knock on effects of being "undesirable" for the large companies that largely prop up a lot of economic sectors can see the economic costs equal to or even greater than the benefits given to your community. It actually looks even worse in Europe - not only is the continent hugely economically diverse in development and in governance structure (some are much less or more corrupt and more or less democratic than others) but the free movement and free trade has functionally taken every nations economic sovereignty. Its the only point on which I can agree with Brexiteers on because the EU is much less democratic an institution than a lot of its constituent national governments are. Ultimately final power comes down to the purse. The EU uses the Euro to control economic policy across the continent, the US Federal Reserve uses the USD to control the US economy. There is nothing you can do as any regional or local power to oppose the will of those higher institutions. Especially if you work in the peoples interests, because then you have the joint problem of attracting the poor and downtrodden because you are trying to uplift your working class while losing the favor of the capital you would depend on to generate the revenues to afford anything. Its by design, to be fair.
AlexTWithBeard 6y ago
I wonder if there are any good examples of successful "degentrification", when a location became more affordable, but didn't turn into a shithole.
- chillacy 6y ago
  My theory is that being king of the foreclosed feels better than being the poorest servant in the metropolis, so it’s still a net gain for these people. Just because status is all relative.

gridlockd 6y ago

NYC is probably worth more as a largely uninhabited speculative asset, a collector's item if you will. There will still be jobs for people to keep it in mint condition.

api 6y ago
That's Vancouver with all its absurdly overpriced uninhabited condo towers that exist only to be money laundering and parking vehicles.

spamizbad 6y ago

> After some digging, I realized that just 10% of the population pays about 71-72% of the taxes. Keep in mind you're talking about a local municipality which is going to receive a large chunk of its revenue from property taxes, fees, sales tax etc. From https://www.ibo.nyc.ny.us/iboreports/understandingthebudget.pdf https://www.ibo.nyc.ny.us/iboreports/understandingthebudget.... The breakdown is: 29% Property Tax 17% State Grants 13% Personal Income Tax 10% Federal Grants 8% General Sales Tax 8% Fees and Fines (Non-Tax) 7% Business Income Tax 4% RE Taxes 4% Other Taxes Some of these will hit the wealthy more than others (eg: Biz and Personal Income Taxes) but revenues aren't going to drop by 71-72%. I know in America taxes are super taboo but there's also nothing wrong with raising taxes on the rest of the city to cover any gap.

throwaway0a5e 6y ago
Or <gasp> reducing services to balance the budget. God forbid they only fill the potholes people complain about. Edit: the pothole was supposed to be a metaphor for something the city does but could do a lot less of without people actually being badly affected.
- free_rms 6y ago
  The richest city on the planet can't afford to fill potholes?
- gumby 6y ago
  people typically only complain about them when they have caused damage to their vehicle. lazy evaluation of maintenance is more expensive in the long run.
- bilbo0s 6y ago
  That's the great thing about being NYC. That 10% of people funding everything are not the typical two or three hundred thousand a year guys that pay taxes in other cities. They are billionaires, most of whom are not even in real estate, who own skyscrapers, or the leases, all over Manhattan. Oftentimes just for vanity, or even just bragging rights over their wife's brother's skyscrapers. (I'm serious. This happened, I was there. And it was at that point I decided some people just had too much money.) When money like that is available to a city, you end up with infrastructure projects of the scale NYC has, the ability to tell your state "thanks but no thanks", Oh, and police departments with intelligence units that outstrip the capabilities of the intelligence apparatus in most Asian and South American nations. The average american has no frame of reference for the kind of wealth at the disposal of NYC. I say, let them fix all the potholes. Regular people may as well get something out of it.
robocat 6y ago
The highest earning 1 percent of New York City residents generated 43 percent of city income taxes From (biased but presumably factual): https://www.empirecenter.org/publications/nycs-high-income-tax-habit/ https://www.empirecenter.org/publications/nycs-high-income-t... Edit: just trying to add info, not bias the conversation! Maybe also relevant: https://www.visualcapitalist.com/3d-map-the-u-s-cities-with-the-highest-economic-output/ https://www.visualcapitalist.com/3d-map-the-u-s-cities-with-...

zanny 6y ago

This is why local politics is generally defanged and powerless. Ultimately you cannot make much meaningful change on the local or state level that is hostile to capitals interests. If what you do is anti-business, even if its in the interests of your actual voting residents, the knock on effects of being "undesirable" for the large companies that largely prop up a lot of economic sectors can see the economic costs equal to or even greater than the benefits given to your community. It actually looks even worse in Europe - not only is the continent hugely economically diverse in development and in governance structure (some are much less or more corrupt and more or less democratic than others) but the free movement and free trade has functionally taken every nations economic sovereignty. Its the only point on which I can agree with Brexiteers on because the EU is much less democratic an institution than a lot of its constituent national governments are. Ultimately final power comes down to the purse. The EU uses the Euro to control economic policy across the continent, the US Federal Reserve uses the USD to control the US economy. There is nothing you can do as any regional or local power to oppose the will of those higher institutions. Especially if you work in the peoples interests, because then you have the joint problem of attracting the poor and downtrodden because you are trying to uplift your working class while losing the favor of the capital you would depend on to generate the revenues to afford anything. Its by design, to be fair.

AlexTWithBeard 6y ago

I wonder if there are any good examples of successful "degentrification", when a location became more affordable, but didn't turn into a shithole.

chillacy 6y ago
My theory is that being king of the foreclosed feels better than being the poorest servant in the metropolis, so it’s still a net gain for these people. Just because status is all relative.