[JayCT]

Originally Posted by Heel82

Connecticut’s population and GDP growth are in the bottom 15% and have been. Whatever else, that is a long term problem.

Connecticut has one of the highest GDP per capita in the country. It ranks third in the ranking below and according to data from the US Federal Reserve, it has consistently grown for years now. More importantly it did not drop significantly during the recession. It does not have to grow a lot. Jay

https://www.investopedia.com/article...gdp-capita.asp

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CTNGSP

[kidyankee764]

Originally Posted by JayCT

As I have previously noted, the reason that the U-6 numbers are virtually meaningless and not reported by economists is that they include people that do not work at regular jobs to make their living. That would include people who live off their investments or who have income from royalties or other sources. Since Connecticut has a lot of financial people and has one of the highest patient rates per capita, it would impact the results. Again you never see it talked about when Economists summarize any state's economy. Jay

Less than 1% of CT’s population lives off of investments and royalties.

[JayCT]

Originally Posted by kidyankee764

...while the people making 200,000 or more is decreasing. Overall, the new residents of CT make 26% less than the ones leaving. This is something that has been discussed over and over, with sources provided.

And again this is primarily due to baby boomers finally retiring and leaving the state for warmer climates. This is nothing new and has been happening for decades. Jay

[JayCT]

Originally Posted by kidyankee764

Less than 1% of CT’s population lives off of investments and royalties.

Source? Jay

[SteveM85]

Originally Posted by JayCT

And again this is primarily due to baby boomers finally retiring and leaving the state for warmer climates. This is nothing new and has been happening for decades. Jay

While this rings true, it has come to more than just that. I am simply amazed at how many individuals we know or meet in a variety of personnel, not just boomers, that are either committed to leaving but not able to sell their homes, or desire to leave but lack confidence in unloading their homes. It's disturbing and not something to be brushed off no matter how refreshing the kool-aid tastes this summer.

[JayCT]

Originally Posted by SteveM85

While this rings true, it has come to more than just that. I am simply amazed at how many individuals we know or meet in a variety of personnel, not just boomers, that are either committed to leaving but not able to sell their homes, or desire to leave but lack confidence in unloading their homes. It's disturbing and not something to be brushed off no matter how refreshing the kool-aid tastes this summer.

Funny, I do not know anyone that is planning to move. We have a neighbor who used to say they were moving after their kids got out of high school but that was years ago. Their kids have been out of school for years now. They haven't moved yet and no longer mention it. As the saying goes, talk is cheap. Jay

[Heel82]

Originally Posted by JayCT

Connecticut has one of the highest GDP per capita in the country. It ranks third in the ranking below and according to data from the US Federal Reserve, it has consistently grown for years now. More importantly it did not drop significantly during the recession. It does not have to grow a lot. Jay

https://www.investopedia.com/article...gdp-capita.asp

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CTNGSP

Wealthy isn’t the same as healthy. Connecticut’s wealth was built up over generations but trend lines are clear. In 2000, Connecticut’s GDP was roughly about 1.6% of the nation’s GDP. Now it’s about 1.3%. That’s a drop of nearly 20% in comparative wealth. You got to confront a stagnant economy and demographics head-on, and not pretend the environment in which Connecticut gained its wealth is still there. It changed, Connecticut will have to adapt.

[JayCT]

Originally Posted by Heel82

Wealthy isn’t the same as healthy. Connecticut’s wealth was built up over generations but trend lines are clear. In 2000, Connecticut’s GDP was roughly about 1.6% of the nation’s GDP. Now it’s about 1.3%. That’s a drop of nearly 20% in comparative wealth. You got to confront a stagnant economy and demographics head-on, and not pretend the environment in which Connecticut gained its wealth is still there. It changed, Connecticut will have to adapt.

We rank 3rd in the nation for GDP per capita. How is that bad? Jay

[Heel82]

Originally Posted by JayCT

We rank 3rd in the nation for GDP per capita. How is that bad? Jay

It’s not bad, but it’s a lingering benefit from a different era. It is a measure of the past which can’t be changed and doesn’t give you any idea of the future which can be. If you are looking backwards while walking forwards, you are liable to fall into a ditch at some point.

[Beeker2211]

Originally Posted by Heel82

It’s not bad, but it’s a lingering benefit from a different era. It is a measure of the past which can’t be changed and doesn’t give you any idea of the future which can be. If you are looking backwards while walking forwards, you are liable to fall into a ditch at some point.

No it's not, it's just that we're so far ahead of most of the Country by GDP per-capita, the growth rate doesn't reflect nominal changes which in many cases may be higher.

Let's say State 1 has a GDP per capita of $1000 one year and a $1100 the next the change is roughly 10%.

State 2 has a GDP per capita of $10,000 one year and $10,800 the next the change is roughly 8% despite being $700 (7 fold more) more nominally than State 1.

If the growth rate dips negative for a long while might be cause for concern, but doesn't seem like that's the case.