Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Most of the people here in the Connecticut forum live or want to live in Connecticut. We can't change the weather so a desire to move south for a warmer climate is a moot point. That is a reality for many people in the aging boomer category who are seeking a warmer climate. The less expensive cost of living of living in a place like Florida is a bonus in that case. For those that weather isn't an issue but the cost is then it is surprising that more people do not choose to move to a place like NH. As for jobs, our neighboring state of Massachusetts has the second lowest unemployment rate in the country and has many booming opportunities in the technology industry. NH has the lowest unemployment rate in the country, no income tax and many affordable communities and is begging for young people to fill numerous positions in many different fields.
Connecticut has led the way in manufacturing and many fields where a high degree of education and experience are essential. We have long valued education and invested in our children's future. In the past families remained relatively close and Connecticut benefited from our talent staying in state. This is no longer the case and now many of our children move away to take advantages of fluid opportunities that are reflective of a global economy. Connecticut needs to develop a plan to shift to the realities of a changing economic structure and move toward reducing costs to retain existing residents and attract new ones. At the same time we must continue to support quality education programs. We should be working together with neighboring states to look at regional economic policies that benefit all of us and avoid costly theft of industries/talent from one state to another. Internally we need to look at efficiencies and out-sourcing of governmental services for some routine services and the strengthening of others like social service, mental health, and housing for the disabled.
Last edited by Lincolnian; 04-09-2017 at 11:06 AM..
What’s the Matter With Connecticut?
The state’s politicians now want to bribe college grads to stay.
April 7, 2017 6:59 p.m. ET
Connecticut’s progressive tax experiment has hit a wall. Tens of thousands of residents are fleeing for lower tax climes, which has prompted Democrats to propose—get this—paying new college grads a thousand bucks to stick around. Maybe they’re afraid an exodus of young people will turn the state Republican.
Hard to believe, but a mere 25 years ago—a lifetime for millennials—Connecticut was a low-tax haven for Northeasterners. The state enacted an income tax in 1991 that was initially a flat 4.5% but was later made steeply progressive. In 2009 former Republican Governor Jodi Rell raised the top rate on individuals earning $500,000 or more to 6.5%, which Democratic Gov. Dannel Malloy has lifted to 6.99% (as if paying 0.01% less than 7% is a government discount).
Connecticut’s top tax rate is now higher than the 5.1% flat rate in the state formerly known as Taxachusetts. In 2012 the Tax Foundation ranked Connecticut’s state and local tax burden second highest in the country behind New York. Due to recent property and income tax hikes, the Nutmeg State may now be in the lead.
You don’t need a Yale degree to figure out the tax hikes have been a disaster. A net 30,000 residents moved to other states last year. Since 2010 seven of Connecticut’s eight counties have lost population, and the hedge-fund haven of Fairfield County shrank for the first time last year. In the last five years, 27,400 Connecticut residents have moved to Florida. Florida Governor Rick Scott should pay Mr. Malloy a broker’s fee.
More than 3,000 Connecticut residents have moved to zero income-tax New Hampshire in the last two years. While liberals wax apocalyptic about Kansas’s tax cuts, the Prairie State has welcomed 1,430 Connecticut refugees since 2011 and reversed the outflow between 2005 and 2009. Yet liberals deny that tax policies influence personal or business decisions.
After losing General Electric to Boston last year, Mr. Malloy bribed the hedge funds Bridgewater and AQR Capital with $57 million in taxpayer subsidies not to leave the state. Other beneficiaries of the Governor’s corporate welfare include Cigna , NBC Sports, ESPN and Charter Communications .
Democratic legislators have now taken the subsidy idea one step further by proposing a tax credit averaging $1,200 for grads of Connecticut colleges who live in the state as well as those of out-of-state schools who move to the state within two years of earning their degree. Democrats say the tax credit would cost the state $6 million each year assuming only 10% of eligible college grads sign on.
Yet the main reason young people are escaping is the lack of job opportunities. Since 2010 employment in Connecticut has grown at half the rate of Massachusetts and more slowly than in Rhode Island, New Jersey or Kansas. If the kids reject the tax-credit deal, maybe Gov. Malloy will start negotiating the terms and conditions for staying with each graduate. Or perhaps Democrats could seek President Trump’s help to build a wall around the state.
Meanwhile, Democrats are wrangling with a projected $1.7 billion budget deficit next year because tax revenues keep trailing projections. The state’s teacher pension bill is projected to grow by a third over the next two years, and some Democrats want to impose a 19% tax on hedge funds’ carried interest. At this rate they’re going to need a much bigger tax bribe for those kids to stay in the state.
What’s the Matter With Connecticut?
The state’s politicians now want to bribe college grads to stay.
April 7, 2017 6:59 p.m. ET
Connecticut’s progressive tax experiment has hit a wall. Tens of thousands of residents are fleeing for lower tax climes, which has prompted Democrats to propose—get this—paying new college grads a thousand bucks to stick around. Maybe they’re afraid an exodus of young people will turn the state Republican.
Hard to believe, but a mere 25 years ago—a lifetime for millennials—Connecticut was a low-tax haven for Northeasterners. The state enacted an income tax in 1991 that was initially a flat 4.5% but was later made steeply progressive. In 2009 former Republican Governor Jodi Rell raised the top rate on individuals earning $500,000 or more to 6.5%, which Democratic Gov. Dannel Malloy has lifted to 6.99% (as if paying 0.01% less than 7% is a government discount).
Connecticut’s top tax rate is now higher than the 5.1% flat rate in the state formerly known as Taxachusetts. In 2012 the Tax Foundation ranked Connecticut’s state and local tax burden second highest in the country behind New York. Due to recent property and income tax hikes, the Nutmeg State may now be in the lead.
You don’t need a Yale degree to figure out the tax hikes have been a disaster. A net 30,000 residents moved to other states last year. Since 2010 seven of Connecticut’s eight counties have lost population, and the hedge-fund haven of Fairfield County shrank for the first time last year. In the last five years, 27,400 Connecticut residents have moved to Florida. Florida Governor Rick Scott should pay Mr. Malloy a broker’s fee.
More than 3,000 Connecticut residents have moved to zero income-tax New Hampshire in the last two years. While liberals wax apocalyptic about Kansas’s tax cuts, the Prairie State has welcomed 1,430 Connecticut refugees since 2011 and reversed the outflow between 2005 and 2009. Yet liberals deny that tax policies influence personal or business decisions.
After losing General Electric to Boston last year, Mr. Malloy bribed the hedge funds Bridgewater and AQR Capital with $57 million in taxpayer subsidies not to leave the state. Other beneficiaries of the Governor’s corporate welfare include Cigna , NBC Sports, ESPN and Charter Communications .
Democratic legislators have now taken the subsidy idea one step further by proposing a tax credit averaging $1,200 for grads of Connecticut colleges who live in the state as well as those of out-of-state schools who move to the state within two years of earning their degree. Democrats say the tax credit would cost the state $6 million each year assuming only 10% of eligible college grads sign on.
Yet the main reason young people are escaping is the lack of job opportunities. Since 2010 employment in Connecticut has grown at half the rate of Massachusetts and more slowly than in Rhode Island, New Jersey or Kansas. If the kids reject the tax-credit deal, maybe Gov. Malloy will start negotiating the terms and conditions for staying with each graduate. Or perhaps Democrats could seek President Trump’s help to build a wall around the state.
Meanwhile, Democrats are wrangling with a projected $1.7 billion budget deficit next year because tax revenues keep trailing projections. The state’s teacher pension bill is projected to grow by a third over the next two years, and some Democrats want to impose a 19% tax on hedge funds’ carried interest. At this rate they’re going to need a much bigger tax bribe for those kids to stay in the state.
I had seen this posted on Facebook. What this opinion piece conveniently forgets to point out is that a Massachusetts and Boston gave GE $160 million to relocate 200 Connecticut jobs to Boston. I find it very slanted that they ignore this but criticize Malloy for giving $57 million to keep several thousand very high paying jobs. I am not saying I like Malloy but at least be fair and reasonable in stating the facts. Jay
The tax credit approach to keeping millennial college graduates here is silly and will prove ineffective. As has been discussed here many times, CT doesn't have what most graduates are seeking-- convenient urban environments with a lot to do, transportation and numerous jobs for new graduates.
We have to build reasons for graduates to stay and get away from the notion that there is a short term solution, like a silly $1200 credit.
Most of the people here in the Connecticut forum live or want to live in Connecticut. We can't change the weather so a desire to move south for a warmer climate is a moot point. That is a reality for many people in the aging boomer category who are seeking a warmer climate. The less expensive cost of living of living in a place like Florida is a bonus in that case. For those that weather isn't an issue but the cost is then it is surprising that more people do not choose to move to a place like NH. As for jobs, our neighboring state of Massachusetts has the second lowest unemployment rate in the country and has many booming opportunities in the technology industry. NH has the lowest unemployment rate in the country, no income tax and many affordable communities and is begging for young people to fill numerous positions in many different fields.
I do know people that have moved to NH and other New England states. But like you said, they have to like the weather. It won't be where I go for that reason.
This article outlines Malloy's plan to help the state's poorest cities and towns stabilize their finances. Of course the state needs to straighten out their own mess before it can seriously help them. Jay
This article outlines Malloy's plan to help the state's poorest cities and towns stabilize their finances. Of course the state needs to straighten out their own mess before it can seriously help them. Jay
In the simplest terms, the governor's own study warns that Connecticut's annual teacher pension bill could grow by a mind-blowing 525 percent — from $1 billion to $6.2 billion — between now and 2032.
If towns have to foot that bill then were in deep trouble. Property taxes will probably have to be doubled, if not quadrupled, or maybe even more. Either that or the towns may have to bankrupt, and maybe the State for that matter. Regardless where in trouble.
If towns have to foot that bill then were in deep trouble. Property taxes will probably have to be doubled, if not quadrupled, or maybe even more. Either that or the towns may have to bankrupt, and maybe the State for that matter. Regardless where in trouble.
It is not that bad. There are 164 school districts in our state so the average liability is $37.8 million over the next 15 years. If this is addressed early and aggressively enough, the burden would be difficult but not bankrupting. Jay
I'm not sure you can really say CT is that awful for unemployment anymore. Since September of last year we caught up with the national average and now are even or better then national unemployment rates for the last 6 months.
Edit:
Our unemployment rate is now mid pack. (#29 4.7%) We are actually lower then Tennessee Texas Florida and North Carolina, but were lagging behind other high tax NE states, New Jersey and Massachusetts.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
