[CTartist]

Originally Posted by MikefromCT

Hmmmm . . . .



https://www.richstatespoorstates.org/states/CT/

According to the website above we are #48 in economic performance.
"Connecticut is currently ranked 48th in the United States for its economic performance"

So riddle me this.

How does CT who ranks consistently in the top 5 for Per Capita Income, rank in the bottom 5 on conservative websites for economic performance. What a load of BS, but then some people do believe the BS.

Per Capita Income
"The following ten states have the highest PCI, in descending order: District of Columbia ($84,538), Connecticut ($79,087), Massachusetts ($74,967), New York ($71,440), New Jersey ($70,979), California ($66,661), Maryland ($65,683), Washington ($64,898), New Hampshire ($63,880), and Wyoming ($63,316)"
https://worldpopulationreview.com/st...ncome-by-state

Well, will you look at that....CT is NUMBER 1 for Per Capita Income

[Johnho771]

Originally Posted by CTartist

According to the website above we are #48 in economic performance.
"Connecticut is currently ranked 48th in the United States for its economic performance"

So riddle me this.

How does CT who ranks consistently in the top 5 for Per Capita Income, rank in the bottom 5 on conservative websites for economic performance. What a load of BS, but then some people do believe the BS.

Per Capita Income
The following ten states have the highest PCI, in descending order: District of Columbia ($84,538), Connecticut ($79,087), Massachusetts ($74,967), New York ($71,440), New Jersey ($70,979), California ($66,661), Maryland ($65,683), Washington ($64,898), New Hampshire ($63,880), and Wyoming ($63,316).
https://worldpopulationreview.com/st...ncome-by-state

Well, will you look at that....CT is NUMBER 1 for Per Capita Income

Per Capita income is a poor economic indicator for a state as a whole. Especially in a small state like, CT, all it takes is one or a few outliers with very high incomes to swing the stat up.

[CTartist]

Originally Posted by Johnho771

Per Capita income is a poor economic indicator for a state as a whole. Especially in a small state like, CT, all it takes is one or a few outliers with very high incomes to swing the stat up.

I have been over this many time on here.

So if you use household income you can have 10 orange pickers in a house making $10,000 (total $100,000) like in FL
or
You can have someone working on Wall Street living in CT making $100,000 living in thier own apartment in Greenwich, Stamford, or Darien etc.

Here is Fairfield County (the richest), New Haven County and Hartford County Per Capita Income. Its not a blowout in Fairfield Counties part.

Hartford County $41,000
New Haven County $39,000
Fairfield County $58,000
https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fa...t,CT/PST045221

Is Fairfield County wealthier.......yes.
Is Fairfield County 10X weatlher.....NO

[WouldLoveTo]

Originally Posted by CTartist

I have been over this many time on here.

So if you use household income you can have 10 orange pickers in a house making $10,000 (total $100,000) like in FL
or
You can have someone working on Wall Street living in CT making $100,000 living in thier own apartment in Greenwich, Stamford, or Darien etc.

Here is Fairfield County (the richest), New Haven County and Hartford County Per Capita Income. It not a blowout in Fairfield Counties part.

Hartford County $41,000
New Haven County $39,000
Fairfield County $58,000
https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fa...t,CT/PST045221

Is Fairfield County wealthier.......yes.
Is Fairfield County 10X weatlher.....NO

It looks like the article you quoted in #17661 used median household income, not per capita.

The link you created says $79,855 for CT Household income and $45,668 PCI

.... unless they are using different years

...... or I'm reading it completely wrong?

[JayCT]

Originally Posted by Johnho771

Per Capita income is a poor economic indicator for a state as a whole. Especially in a small state like, CT, all it takes is one or a few outliers with very high incomes to swing the stat up.

Then how about per capita Gross Domestic Product? We are always in the Top 10. How can a state with very high per capita GDP, high income and low unemployment (4.1%) be considered to have a bad economy? It makes no sense.

The problem is that they base this ranking strictly on the change in GDP. Connecticut does not have great growth in GDP in part because we do not have great population growth. That however should not matter though since we are already at the top in all indicators. Again it makes no sense to say we have a bad economy when we rank so high in every key indicator.

I’ve been fighting this ridiculous logic for years now. I just recently contacted the US Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis about this. Their Senior Analyst replied that they had not considered this, they were simply reporting changes in GDP and it should not be used to judge a state’s economy. I suggested they include the per capita ranking in future reports so that states like Connecticut aren’t misjudged. He said they would consider my concerns. We will see if they change it. Jay

[mdovell]

GDP is skewed because frankly the defense industry props it up. If 100 people work at electric boat making a submarine that costs 100 million they aren't making a million each. Moreover the trickled down effects aren't as large. Same with making missiles and takes and jet fighters etc.

Population growth ultimately does matter because if manufacturing is still based on skilled onsite labor who takes the job when people retire? I have TTM and 3M near me that are begging for people to work there. If you cannot find people to do a job what are the real long term solutions.

1) Increase pay/benefits - Maybe but by how much
2) Move the job somewhere else - This can happen just look at how many are owned by out of state entities
3) Incorporate the job with others - Good luck doing that
4) Outsource the work - Might not be possible

I don't think GDP is directly linked to growth or a shrinking population but it's much harder to grow an economy when it starts shrinking. Where I am the town population has dropped 5% in the past ten years (2020 vs 2010). Now if you live in the center of town it is flat so you might not think that but once you drive around it becomes a bit obvious with some of the empty buildings. Heck the McDonalds is hardly staffed and people have waited a half hour for fries!

There are many industries that are based on volume, not high profit margin. Supermarkets come to mind. The overall economy is OK but it's the long term issues that are the problem. Once you start to see a lower population it becomes much harder to maintain anything. I was just in west hartford and it still looks great but I can see empty storefronts and now there's some homeless at streetlights I never saw before. Too much of a reliance on financial jobs that can be done at home.

[CTartist]

Originally Posted by mdovell

GDP is skewed because frankly the defense industry props it up.

Are you kidding me? Defense is the best industry for an area. Let' face it, the one thing most Americans can agree on is we need more stuff to stock our military. Americans love a good fight as long as the fighting takes place in other countries and not our own.

Name me an instance when the defense budget was cut in a dramatic way in the last 50 years. Having military installations and industries that make stuff for the military is like a printing press for money in that area.

You do realize that the military stuff being made is also sold to other countries, right?

[JayCT]

Originally Posted by mdovell

GDP is skewed because frankly the defense industry props it up. If 100 people work at electric boat making a submarine that costs 100 million they aren't making a million each. Moreover the trickled down effects aren't as large. Same with making missiles and takes and jet fighters etc.

Population growth ultimately does matter because if manufacturing is still based on skilled onsite labor who takes the job when people retire? I have TTM and 3M near me that are begging for people to work there. If you cannot find people to do a job what are the real long term solutions.

1) Increase pay/benefits - Maybe but by how much
2) Move the job somewhere else - This can happen just look at how many are owned by out of state entities
3) Incorporate the job with others - Good luck doing that
4) Outsource the work - Might not be possible

I don't think GDP is directly linked to growth or a shrinking population but it's much harder to grow an economy when it starts shrinking. Where I am the town population has dropped 5% in the past ten years (2020 vs 2010). Now if you live in the center of town it is flat so you might not think that but once you drive around it becomes a bit obvious with some of the empty buildings. Heck the McDonalds is hardly staffed and people have waited a half hour for fries!

There are many industries that are based on volume, not high profit margin. Supermarkets come to mind. The overall economy is OK but it's the long term issues that are the problem. Once you start to see a lower population it becomes much harder to maintain anything. I was just in west hartford and it still looks great but I can see empty storefronts and now there's some homeless at streetlights I never saw before. Too much of a reliance on financial jobs that can be done at home.

Once again, what are you talking about??? Defense industry work does not skew GDP. It’s as a part of it as anything. Is Michigan’s GDP inaccurate because cars are assembled there when parts come from all over? No, it’s not. There is nothing wrong with defense industry work. It pays well and gives a lot of good steady employment.

Of course population growth affects GDP. It definitely adds to it. People don’t move to places without jobs and those jobs add to the GDP. That is why high population growth states see significant changes in GDP. Connecticut though is slightly different in that we don’t have high population growth so we don’t have big changes in GDP but that’s not necessarily bad since Connecticut is among the very top for per capita GDP and income. As I said we don’t have to have great change in GDP, we are already there with high per capita GDP, high income and disposable income and low unemployment. You can’t get much better than that. Jay

[kidyankee764]

CT does have a very high GDP, and that cannot be disputed. GDP *growth* in CT is almost dead last of all 50 states. That’s where the problem lies.

The same can be said for income growth.

[BobNJ1960]

Originally Posted by kidyankee764

CT does have a very high GDP, and that cannot be disputed. GDP *growth* in CT is almost dead last of all 50 states. That’s where the problem lies.

The same can be said for income growth.

agreed. (I say that as a Met fan who watched his team lose a 10.5 game lead.)