[HumpDay]

Originally Posted by HeadedWest

Sure, but the growing gap of taxes between the two states strongly skews the choice toward Florida.



Kansas weather? Similar to CT? Not on this planet.

Those tornadoes? No thanks

[Mr_250]

Not that this matters to millionaires but has anyone talked about the cost of college in Florida? If you are a Florida resident you can go to a state college for like $7,500 a semester. That could be another perk why people move there.

Either way, millionaires move because of the weather, not taxes.

Back to Connecticuts economy...

[Henry10]

Originally Posted by MrGompers

It would make more sense to compare migration from CT to another low tax state that has similar weather such as Kansas. I don't think many people are flocking to KS for lower taxes.

Then how do you explain people moving out of CT, but into North Dakota, and out of Southern California and into Northern Idaho?

It can't be the weather, can it?

[Henry10]

Originally Posted by Mr_250

Either way, millionaires move because of the weather, not taxes.

Not true. Especially millionaires move because of taxes. They have the most to lose. They can get the weather anywhere, by flying into it.

[RunD1987]

Originally Posted by Henry10

Then how do you explain people moving out of CT, but into North Dakota, and out of Southern California and into Northern Idaho?

It can't be the weather, can it?

$6000 in-state at FSU about a year and $9000 a year at a CT State school for in-state. About even for out-of-state

[RonaldusMagnus]

Originally Posted by Beeker2211

Lol all that link says is make your money in CT, NY, MA, PA, IL, and CA and retire somewhere cheaper. It says nothing on how productive the economy is for individuals

That is a seriously flawed interpretation since it is a NET number. Incredible. You can also flip to see net population shift in those states which is outward. Boggles the mind how people will contort themselves to believe tax policy is not a factor in where people decide to live.

[RonaldusMagnus]

Originally Posted by Henry10

Then how do you explain people moving out of CT, but into North Dakota, and out of Southern California and into Northern Idaho?

It can't be the weather, can it?

If your theory were true, why are people jettisoning California, whose weather is significantly nicer year round than Florida? California is losing wealth to (in order): Nevada, Arizona, Texas, Oregon, Washington. Please tell me which of those states people are flocking to for weather purposes? Again, no one is saying weather is not a factor in retirement, of course it is. But a big factor is the taxes as well. Denial doesnt make the fact any less true.

[BPt111]

Despite UBS and Royal Bank of Scotland shedding jobs, Stamford is the bull's-eye when it comes to Connecticut growth. It's the state's fastest growing city with a stable tax base and, most important, a link to New York — which is projected to create 2 million additional jobs in the next generation, McGee said. "Connecticut needs to get a piece of that."

A Lofty Goal Of 500,000 Jobs Emerges From Economic Chaos - Hartford Courant

[JayCT]

Originally Posted by BPt111

Despite UBS and Royal Bank of Scotland shedding jobs, Stamford is the bull's-eye when it comes to Connecticut growth. It's the state's fastest growing city with a stable tax base and, most important, a link to New York — which is projected to create 2 million additional jobs in the next generation, McGee said. "Connecticut needs to get a piece of that."

A Lofty Goal Of 500,000 Jobs Emerges From Economic Chaos - Hartford Courant

This article does a good job of summarizing where we stand here in Connecticut. We have a very enviable economy and we could build upon it but the question is "how much do we want to?" Growth means problems, bigger problems than we already have. Traffic is bad in and around our cities. Do we want to make it worse with a high growth rate? Housing in Fairfield County is among the most expensive in the country. Do we want it to be even more expensive? Our suburbs have spread across a lot of the open land already. Do we want it to spread across the little land we have remaining? These are tough questions to answer but we need to look long and hard at the impacts as we answer them. Jay

[Beeker2211]

Originally Posted by RonaldusMagnus

That is a seriously flawed interpretation since it is a NET number. Incredible. You can also flip to see net population shift in those states which is outward. Boggles the mind how people will contort themselves to believe tax policy is not a factor in where people decide to live.

What I was saying is that if a state's goal is to just be a place to usurp wealth, good on them, but it doesn't bode well for the economy writ large. People are going to have to retire, and most prefer to do it where housing (the big factor), weather (another big factor), and yes taxes (to a much less degree) seem lower. But it's not like the general population in those states are being particularly productive per capita compared to (which is not their fault). What happens to these places IF their spigot from the higher productive wealth ends, for whatever reason or another? Many states rely heavily on this influx of wealth, but its really just shuffling chairs on a boat.

Like could the modal person in NV afford to retire to CA after a lifetime of work in NV should they want to? If no, then it's tough to say that we should emulate that. Could they afford to retire in NV or would they look towards ID or NM to stretch out their retirement dollar?