[James Bond 007]

I lived in Seattle for some 25 years until several years ago, and I always noticed a lot of Florida license plates there. This seemed really odd since Florida was literally the farthest-away state from Washington state. Why would so many people drive so far? I could see that maybe a lot of people might fly to Seattle from Florida, but drive?? Seriously, I think Florida plates were about the 4th or 5th most common out-of-state plates I saw there.

A co-worker at a job I worked at noticed this as well, and he theorized that, since there were a lot of Navy installations around Puget Sound, that maybe all these Florida plates were Navy enlistees. He noted that military people stationed at a base in another state from where they live can keep their home state plates. So maybe there happened to be a lot of Naval enlistees and officers from Florida stationed around Seattle. Plus there's Fort Lewis and McCord AFB south of Tacoma, adding to the military presence.

OK ... maybe. Seemed like a reasonable theory.

Fast forward several years, and I'm now in Kansas City. Guess what? I see a lot of Florida plates here, too. Like, probably the 5th or 6th most common out-of-state plates (not counting both Missouri and Kansas, of course). I am certain I see a lot more Florida plates than California plates, even though they're both about the same distance away (and California is considerably larger than Florida, too, and thus would have more drivers).

Fort Leavenworth is nearby here, but I don't think it's big enough of an Army base to account for all the Florida plates I see here. I can think of no other reason.

Does anybody in other states notice this?

Is it retired people in Florida visiting relatives, and they prefer to drive long distances instead of flying? After all, there's a ton of retired people in Florida who undoubtedly hail from all over the US.

But do so many retired people really like to drive for, like, 2 or 3 days? Or 5 days to get to Seattle? If I were retired I don't think I'd like to spend that much time driving, even though I had a ton of free time on my hands.

Aside from that I can't think of any other reason, and that reason doesn't seem very probable.

[kidyankee764]

Florida is one of the most populated states, and has the second lowest percentage of born and bred residents, meaning most came from elsewhere. I’d imagine this is partially why.

[James Bond 007]

Originally Posted by kidyankee764

Florida is one of the most populated states, and has the second lowest percentage of born and bred residents, meaning most came from elsewhere. I’d imagine this is partially why.

I thought of that too, but as I said, here in KC I see a lot more Florida plates than California plates, which is much more populous. I always see waaay more Florida plates than NY plates, even though both have about the same population.

The other big state - Texas - I do see a ton of plates around here, but that's because it's not too far away (Dallas is about an 8 hour drive away).

[MOforthewin]

Originally Posted by James Bond 007

I lived in Seattle for some 25 years until several years ago, and I always noticed a lot of Florida license plates there. This seemed really odd since Florida was literally the farthest-away state from Washington state. Why would so many people drive so far? I could see that maybe a lot of people might fly to Seattle from Florida, but drive?? Seriously, I think Florida plates were about the 4th or 5th most common out-of-state plates I saw there.

A co-worker at a job I worked at noticed this as well, and he theorized that, since there were a lot of Navy installations around Puget Sound, that maybe all these Florida plates were Navy enlistees. He noted that military people stationed at a base in another state from where they live can keep their home state plates. So maybe there happened to be a lot of Naval enlistees and officers from Florida stationed around Seattle. Plus there's Fort Lewis and McCord AFB south of Tacoma, adding to the military presence.

OK ... maybe. Seemed like a reasonable theory.

Fast forward several years, and I'm now in Kansas City. Guess what? I see a lot of Florida plates here, too. Like, probably the 5th or 6th most common out-of-state plates (not counting both Missouri and Kansas, of course). I am certain I see a lot more Florida plates than California plates, even though they're both about the same distance away (and California is considerably larger than Florida, too, and thus would have more drivers).

Fort Leavenworth is nearby here, but I don't think it's big enough of an Army base to account for all the Florida plates I see here. I can think of no other reason.

Does anybody in other states notice this?

Is it retired people in Florida visiting relatives, and they prefer to drive long distances instead of flying? After all, there's a ton of retired people in Florida who undoubtedly hail from all over the US.

But do so many retired people really like to drive for, like, 2 or 3 days? Or 5 days to get to Seattle? If I were retired I don't think I'd like to spend that much time driving, even though I had a ton of free time on my hands.

Aside from that I can't think of any other reason, and that reason doesn't seem very probable.

My cousin was born in FL. He is stationed in WA state and probably has FL plates still since he was just transferred there back in Jan. from Jacksonville.

[OpinionInOcala]

Originally Posted by James Bond 007

I lived in Seattle for some 25 years until several years ago, and I always noticed a lot of Florida license plates there. This seemed really odd since Florida was literally the farthest-away state from Washington state. Why would so many people drive so far? I could see that maybe a lot of people might fly to Seattle from Florida, but drive?? Seriously, I think Florida plates were about the 4th or 5th most common out-of-state plates I saw there.

A co-worker at a job I worked at noticed this as well, and he theorized that, since there were a lot of Navy installations around Puget Sound, that maybe all these Florida plates were Navy enlistees. He noted that military people stationed at a base in another state from where they live can keep their home state plates. So maybe there happened to be a lot of Naval enlistees and officers from Florida stationed around Seattle. Plus there's Fort Lewis and McCord AFB south of Tacoma, adding to the military presence.

OK ... maybe. Seemed like a reasonable theory.

Fast forward several years, and I'm now in Kansas City. Guess what? I see a lot of Florida plates here, too. Like, probably the 5th or 6th most common out-of-state plates (not counting both Missouri and Kansas, of course). I am certain I see a lot more Florida plates than California plates, even though they're both about the same distance away (and California is considerably larger than Florida, too, and thus would have more drivers).

Fort Leavenworth is nearby here, but I don't think it's big enough of an Army base to account for all the Florida plates I see here. I can think of no other reason.

Does anybody in other states notice this?

Is it retired people in Florida visiting relatives, and they prefer to drive long distances instead of flying? After all, there's a ton of retired people in Florida who undoubtedly hail from all over the US.

But do so many retired people really like to drive for, like, 2 or 3 days? Or 5 days to get to Seattle? If I were retired I don't think I'd like to spend that much time driving, even though I had a ton of free time on my hands.

Aside from that I can't think of any other reason, and that reason doesn't seem very probable.

I can only speak anecdotally, but many of the retirees I either know or have come into contact with like to do these sorts of extended road trips vs flying — particularly when they're not loaded with FU money. Common reasons given:

• Recreation/adventure.
• Visit family.
• Acute awareness of mortality and/or desire to hold-on to freedom/independence until one cannot any longer.
• Disdain for perceived incompetence everywhere in the workforce.
• Worry over prospective damage/loss/theft of personal property in transit.
• Expected irritation or altercation with/in the presence of other travelers who don't know how to behave themselves.
• The cost of flying plus rental vehicle is exorbitant; rental vehicles are an increasing hassle to procure reliably, companies erroneously claim they're damaged upon return, or the elderly are getting confused during various phases of the respective processes as they're not as technologically savvy.

[James Bond 007]

I would think that elderly people wouldn't like to do so much driving ... but maybe that's just me.

I don't see too many Arizona plates, which would be a similar retirement state. I see one once in a while, but not nearly as many as Florida.

[OpinionInOcala]

Originally Posted by James Bond 007

I would think that elderly people wouldn't like to do so much driving ... but maybe that's just me.

I don't see too many Arizona plates, which would be a similar retirement state. I see one once in a while, but not nearly as many as Florida.

It'd be interesting to see some research (age-groupings in 10-year increments beginning at 50, geographic origin, general health & psychological profiles, etc.) on the matter at scale. The elderly I've encountered have seemed pretty equally split between maintaining an almost defiant level of independence versus exercising comparatively fearful independence (insofar as driving is concerned). The auto insurance industry has long said the elderly as a whole tend to drive less, and less distance from their residence. That made perfect sense to me prior to my wife and I moving here — I can't imagine all of these Villagers and OTOW residents are the only ones bucking the trend.

Either way, that's an interesting observation/discussion you've created here. I'm genuinely curious.

[James Bond 007]

The other thing I was thinking of a possibility would be rental cars. I've rented cars here in KC for local use that have had, like, Tennessee plates and other out of state plates. That happens when people rent a car in Tennessee, drive to KC and drop off their rental car here (presumably flying back, or something). So, rental cars with out of state plates can accumulate in a city.

So, then a lot of the cars with Florida plates I see here would actually be rental cars.

However, for that to happen you'd still have to have a lot of people from Florida driving here, but just dropping their rental cars off here, and then maybe flying back.

Thinking about that also made me wonder another possibility: Do rental car companies, for whatever reason, just like to put Florida tags on their cars even if they're not going to use them in Florida? Is there some advantage to having license tags from Florida compared to other states (like, maybe extraordinarily cheap)? And, can a car rental company buy some cars for some offices in Kansas City, but get Florida tags for them? I have no idea if that's legal or not, but it's another thing I thought of.

EDIT: Or can car rental companies buy their cars in Florida, thus getting Florida tags, and then shipping them to other states? Maybe the sales tax on new cars is extra cheap in Florida, and thus is an incentive for fleet buyers to mass purchase cars from there?

[James Bond 007]

Originally Posted by James Bond 007

EDIT: Or can car rental companies buy their cars in Florida, thus getting Florida tags, and then shipping them to other states? Maybe the sales tax on new cars is extra cheap in Florida, and thus is an incentive for fleet buyers to mass purchase cars from there?

Answering my own question here, the answer is an emphatic NO. Florida actually has one of the higher sales tax rates on cars in the US:
https://wisevoter.com/state-rankings...-tax-by-state/

[FL_Expert]

Lots and lots of tax residents. Live here 6 months and 1 day and don’t pay a state income tax, then go wherever else you want for the other half of the year.