are you sick of Harry Reid?

[steveox]

Harry wants his own Liberal plan now. I Hope the house blocks it

http://news.yahoo.com/dems-gop-still-loggerheads-clock-ticks-074111936.html

 

[BigRob]

I think you're missing the point! Yes, some of the "Blue" states are more expensive to live in. . .and STILL they don't need as much assistance from the government as many of the "Red" states!

And I am telling you that it is a bogus study when cost of living is not accounted for. For example, I would wager New York gets less back than they pay in, and a large part of that is probably because of NYC, where you have to make $250,000 just to be middle class. This means much higher taxes are collected than in a Mississippi, for example, where if you earn $50,000 a year you are still doing alright. So obviously New York will send in far more tax dollars, but who is better off?

By the way, this is NOT an assumption. It was reported in detail yesterday on CNN, with very precise numbers. If necessary, I will be glad to find a specific link for you, with the EXACT numbers! But I remember Alaska being one of the most unevened ratio between contribution to and receipt from the Feds.

I was referring to my comments (to you in a different thread) that the idea of "red states" can be very misleading.

 

[Openmind]

And I am telling you that it is a bogus study when cost of living is not accounted for. For example, I would wager New York gets less back than they pay in, and a large part of that is probably because of NYC, where you have to make $250,000 just to be middle class. This means much higher taxes are collected than in a Mississippi, for example, where if you earn $50,000 a year you are still doing alright. So obviously New York will send in far more tax dollars, but who is better off?




I was referring to my comments (to you in a different thread) that the idea of "red states" can be very misleading.

New York pays more taxes. . .obviously! But they also have a MUCH larger infrastructure, police force, etc. .to support within the State.

And, since life is so expensive there, compared to other States, and still, they don't need to access huge assistance from the Feds, that seems to indicate that it is working better!

 

[BigRob]

New York pays more taxes. . .obviously! But they also have a MUCH larger infrastructure, police force, etc. .to support within the State.

And they have far more dollars to do it with because people have to make far more money to survive, and there is no distinction in the tax rates.

And, since life is so expensive there, compared to other States, and still, they don't need to access huge assistance from the Feds, that seems to indicate that it is working better!

All it really seems to indicate is that they have a larger tax base...mainly due to a higher cost of living.

 

[Openmind]

And they have far more dollars to do it with because people have to make far more money to survive, and there is no distinction in the tax rates.



All it really seems to indicate is that they have a larger tax base...mainly due to a higher cost of living.

Soooo. . .you're saying that "more tax" helps the economy?

Thanks!

 

[BigRob]

Soooo. . .you're saying that "more tax" helps the economy?

Thanks!

You know full well I have said, nor am I saying, nothing of the kind.

 

[Openmind]

You know full well I have said, nor am I saying, nothing of the kind.

Well, you say that New Jersey (for exemple) contributes more to the Federal government than they receive from the Federal government because of their greater tax base. . .which equates to greater revenues. . .

So, in spite of the huge infrastructure needs, police force, and all other programs that are necessary to keep that state booming, they manage to do very well without the help of the government. . .while others, who don't pay as much taxes, (therefore, in the GOP book, should be more successful in creating new jobs and promoting new business enterprises) need 4 to 5 time the amount of their contribution to the Feds in ASSISTANCE from the feds! And, let's face it. . .those programs ARE more expensive (because of the cost of living) in New Jersey, or NY City than they are in "nowhere Alabama!"

There seems to be some kind of weird contradiction there. Could you explain clearly?
Thanks.

 

[BigRob]

Well, you say that New Jersey (for exemple) contributes more to the Federal government than they receive from the Federal government because of their greater tax base. . .which equates to greater revenues. . .

Yes, we increase revenues by expanding the tax base, not just increasing taxes.

So, in spite of the huge infrastructure needs, police force, and all other programs that are necessary to keep that state booming, they manage to do very well without the help of the government. .

They are not booming, by any stretch of the imagination. They just have more people that make more money, because to live there it is (in many parts at least) far more expensive.

.while others, who don't pay as much taxes, (therefore, in the GOP book,
should be more successful in creating new jobs and promoting new business enterprises) need 4 to 5 time the amount of their contribution to the Feds in ASSISTANCE from the feds!

I believe I can show many examples of business leaving those type states due to their tax structures etc. Taking assistance from the Feds is not relevant to producing a favorable business climate.

That said, a state like Montana is going to have a lot of open areas and land to build roads on that a New Jersey won't have. So while New Jersey has more "rich" people according to the tax code and therefore collects more real dollars, they are not any better off because of it, nor does it account for the varying scenarios by state.

And, let's face it. . .those programs ARE more expensive (because of the cost of living) in New Jersey, or NY City than they are in "nowhere Alabama!"

There seems to be some kind of weird contradiction there. Could you explain clearly?

They are not automatically more expensive at all. There are parts of NJ that are very cheap. You need a ton more data to clearly state with authority that this claim is accurate.

 

[Openmind]

Yes, we increase revenues by expanding the tax base, not just increasing taxes

.

But, you increased the tax base because of a good climate for business. . .in spite of higher taxes in those states!

They are not booming, by any stretch of the imagination. They just have more people that make more money, because to live there it is (in many parts at least) far more expensive.

They may not be "booming" (That's the point. . .no state is "booming" this days!), but they certainly are not suffering as much as the "bible belt states!" And, as you pointed out. . .it is more expensive to live there, so the fact that the people make more money is just a moot point: If it you make $200,000 a year, and it costs you $36,000 to rent an apartment in New York, you are not better off than if you make $50,000 a year, and it costs you $9,000 a year to rent the same apartment! Once again, you are kind of contradicting your premise!

I believe I can show many examples of business leaving those type states due to their tax structures etc. Taking assistance from the Feds is not relevant to producing a favorable business climate.

You're correct, the red states are in trouble, and businesses are leaving those areas, because they prefer to move to "blue states" where business is more active, in spite of greater tax burden! It is not "how much you're taxed!" It's what those taxes provide you with (like good infrastructure!)"

That said, a state like Montana is going to have a lot of open areas and land to build roads on that a New Jersey won't have. So while New Jersey has more "rich" people according to the tax code and therefore collects more real dollars, they are not any better off because of it, nor does it account for the varying scenarios by state.

Montana is being bought by those rich people! By thousands of acres! My husband was born and grew up in Montana, he still has many friends there, who have never left the small town they grew up in. . . today, Montana is the perfect exemple of "very rich and very poor!" NO ONE there, neither the wealthy who bought those thousands of acres ranch to get away from civilisation, nor the native of Montana who are struggling to keep their "natural" life style are anxious to promote "NY like" infrastructure or businesses!

They are not automatically more expensive at all. There are parts of NJ that are very cheap. You need a ton more data to clearly state with authority that this claim is accurate.

Yes, you're right I need more data. . .and so do you!

 

[BigRob]

But, you increased the tax base because of a good climate for business. . .in spite of higher taxes in those states!



They may not be "booming" (That's the point. . .no state is "booming" this days!), but they certainly are not suffering as much as the "bible belt states!" And, as you pointed out. . .it is more expensive to live there, so the fact that the people make more money is just a moot point: If it you make $200,000 a year, and it costs you $36,000 to rent an apartment in New York, you are not better off than if you make $50,000 a year, and it costs you $9,000 a year to rent the same apartment! Once again, you are kind of contradicting your premise!

That is the premise! They make more money, and therefore pay more taxes, but are no better off automatically.

You're correct, the red states are in trouble, and businesses are leaving those areas, because they prefer to move to "blue states" where business is more
active, in spite of greater tax burden! It is not "how much you're taxed!" It's what those taxes provide you with (like good infrastructure!)"

This is a laughable statement. Business are fleeing CA for places like TX. We saw Catepillar recently discuss leaving Illinois because of their taxes.

Montana is being bought by those rich people! By thousands of acres! My husband was born and grew up in Montana, he still has many friends there, who have never left the small town they grew up in. . . today, Montana is the
perfect exemple of "very rich and very poor!" NO ONE there, neither the wealthy who bought those thousands of acres ranch to get away from civilisation, nor the native of Montana who are struggling to keep their "natural" life style are anxious to promote "NY like" infrastructure or businesses!

They are anxious to have roads I would wager.

Yes, you're right I need more data. . .and so do you!

I do! And I admit it. But it is you running around citing your red state/blue state data like it means something.

 

[Openmind]

That is the premise! They make more money, and therefore pay more taxes, but are no better off automatically.




This is a laughable statement. Business are fleeing CA for places like TX. We saw Catepillar recently discuss leaving Illinois because of their taxes.



They are anxious to have roads I would wager.



I do! And I admit it. But it is you running around citing your red state/blue state data like it means something.

That's because it DOES mean something! Maybe you should try watching CNN once in awhile. . .they did a whole expose on this just yesterday! Very interesting!

 

[BigRob]

That's because it DOES mean something!

It means what it means to those who are already slanted towards one party. I don't find claims to be worth the paper they are written on due to many factors and the inability to account for tons of variables...

It means about as much as me saying Conservatives are more generous than liberals.

Maybe you should try watching CNN once in awhile. . .they did a whole expose on this just yesterday! Very interesting!

I do...in fact I even watch MSNBC as well. But just because something is reported doesn't mean it means much.

 

[Openmind]

It means what it means to those who are already slanted towards one party. I don't find claims to be worth the paper they are written on due to many factors and the inability to account for tons of variables...

It means about as much as me saying Conservatives are more generous than liberals.



I do...in fact I even watch MSNBC as well. But just because something is reported doesn't mean it means much.

Correct, especially if it is reported by Fox News!

And YOU DID say that Conservatives are more generous than Liberals!

 

[BigRob]

Correct, especially if it is reported by Fox News!

And YOU DID say that Conservatives are more generous than Liberals!

Posting from my phone here, so bear with the short replies. I did indeed say that, which is why I thought it was an appropriate analogy.

 

[Pandora]

Posting from my phone here, so bear with the short replies. I did indeed say that, which is why I thought it was an appropriate analogy.

It is also true