New York and California loses over 90 billion

News and events of the day
Glennfs
Posts: 10301
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 12:54 pm

New York and California loses over 90 billion

Post by Glennfs »

In income over the last 2 years. While Florida gained 39 billion and Texas 11 billion.

How odd that inspite of what liberals especially the liberal press say think and believe about Texas and Florida people and jobs continue to flock to those conservative states.

The way people here talk and believe a person would think it would be liberal havens like New York and especially California where people would be clamoring to relocate.

Why even in racist backwater York County South Carolina there have been permits issued for over 4000 houses within 10 miles of my home. Almost all priced over $300,000.

So odd that regular people want to live and bring up their families in places where liberals are so rare and the local and state government is controlled by conservatives. Maybe just maybe you progressives here are out of touch with the things regular folks want. Thar being personal freedom low taxes and fewer government regulations.

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/05/02/new-yor ... tates.html
" I am a socialist " Bernie Sanders
gounion
Posts: 17242
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 4:59 pm

Re: New York and California loses over 90 billion

Post by gounion »

If the opposite were true, you'd say it didn't matter.
Glennfs
Posts: 10301
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 12:54 pm

Re: New York and California loses over 90 billion

Post by Glennfs »

gounion wrote: Tue May 30, 2023 7:24 am If the opposite were true, you'd say it didn't matter.
Like you just did?
Fact is the opposite is not true and other than people who are upper middle class aka millionaires by your standards are fleeing California and New York state to a lesser extent.
Doing so primarily because of the liberals running the state.
" I am a socialist " Bernie Sanders
gounion
Posts: 17242
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 4:59 pm

Re: New York and California loses over 90 billion

Post by gounion »

Glennfs wrote: Tue May 30, 2023 7:26 am Like you just did?
Fact is the opposite is not true and other than people who are upper middle class aka millionaires by your standards are fleeing California and New York state to a lesser extent.
Doing so primarily because of the liberals running the state.
Oh, it matters, but it doesn't mean people love conservatism and hates liberalism.

Lots of people took the opportunity to work remotely. But the truth is, California and New York are the centers of business and innovation in the USA. I mean, unlike you, Zowie is honest about the problems California are experiencing. The problem California has had is because of it's popularity, and it's overpopulated.
Glennfs
Posts: 10301
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 12:54 pm

Re: New York and California loses over 90 billion

Post by Glennfs »

gounion wrote: Tue May 30, 2023 7:29 am Oh, it matters, but it doesn't mean people love conservatism and hates liberalism.

Lots of people took the opportunity to work remotely. But the truth is, California and New York are the centers of business and innovation in the USA. I mean, unlike you, Zowie is honest about the problems California are experiencing. The problem California has had is because of it's popularity, and it's overpopulated.
That must be Chicago's problem also
" I am a socialist " Bernie Sanders
gounion
Posts: 17242
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 4:59 pm

Re: New York and California loses over 90 billion

Post by gounion »

Glennfs wrote: Tue May 30, 2023 7:33 am That must be Chicago's problem also
They sure aren't going to Alabama.
Glennfs
Posts: 10301
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 12:54 pm

Re: New York and California loses over 90 billion

Post by Glennfs »

gounion wrote: Tue May 30, 2023 7:38 am They sure aren't going to Alabama.
Alabama and Mississippi have geographic problems which makes much of the two states hard to reach.

Also it is hard to entice an employer into counties with such small populations.
One of the things South Carolina has going for it is because of our location we have interstate highways accessible from just about everywhere.

So when we reinvented our state from agriculture and cotton mills into the diverse industries we now have it made it much easier.
While Alabama and Mississippi geographically are very limited.
" I am a socialist " Bernie Sanders
User avatar
Toonces
Posts: 919
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 9:52 pm

Re: New York and California loses over 90 billion

Post by Toonces »

California and New York are two of the larger 'give' states, as opposed to 'take', so that will impact their 'income'.

California is still far and away the largest state in terms of GDP.

Of course, there is a continuous ebb and flow of population between states and it changes all the time.
Glennfs
Posts: 10301
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 12:54 pm

Re: New York and California loses over 90 billion

Post by Glennfs »

Toonces wrote: Tue May 30, 2023 9:31 am California and New York are two of the larger 'give' states, as opposed to 'take', so that will impact their 'income'.

California is still far and away the largest state in terms of GDP.

Of course, there is a continuous ebb and flow of population between states and it changes all the time.

That give vs take states is a big misnomer.
Of course if a small state has military bases it is going to make the numbers look like something they aren't.
Also here in South Carolina we have a deep water port that gets federal money spent on.
Things like the deep water port and military bases benefit all Americans. We in South Carolina are just fortunate enough that by shear l luck they are in our state.
" I am a socialist " Bernie Sanders
JoeMemphis

Re: New York and California loses over 90 billion

Post by JoeMemphis »

Toonces wrote: Tue May 30, 2023 9:31 am California and New York are two of the larger 'give' states, as opposed to 'take', so that will impact their 'income'.

California is still far and away the largest state in terms of GDP.

Of course, there is a continuous ebb and flow of population between states and it changes all the time.
Define what you mean by a give state and a take state.
User avatar
ZoWie
Posts: 5108
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 4:39 pm
Location: The blue parts of the map

Re: New York and California loses over 90 billion

Post by ZoWie »

Oh shit, not that one again. Glenn needs some new material.
"We must remember that we cannot abandon the truth and remain a free nation." --Liz Cheney, Republican, 7/21/22
Glennfs
Posts: 10301
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 12:54 pm

Re: New York and California loses over 90 billion

Post by Glennfs »

JoeMemphis wrote: Tue May 30, 2023 10:18 am Define what you mean by a give state and a take state.
Give states allegedly pay more to the government than they get.
Take states allegedly receive more than they pay.

I hear this on Thom Hartmann quite often. In fact we are the United States of America and money spent on military bases in Oklahoma and on deep water ports in South Carolina benefit all Americans
" I am a socialist " Bernie Sanders
User avatar
ZoWie
Posts: 5108
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 4:39 pm
Location: The blue parts of the map

Re: New York and California loses over 90 billion

Post by ZoWie »

And spending money on containerization and rail connections in the San Pedro and Long Beach harbors south of LA didn't help business???????

---------

"I am a realist." -Z
"We must remember that we cannot abandon the truth and remain a free nation." --Liz Cheney, Republican, 7/21/22
JoeMemphis

Re: New York and California loses over 90 billion

Post by JoeMemphis »

Glennfs wrote: Tue May 30, 2023 11:21 am Give states allegedly pay more to the government than they get.
Take states allegedly receive more than they pay.

I hear this on Thom Hartmann quite often. In fact we are the United States of America and money spent on military bases in Oklahoma and on deep water ports in South Carolina benefit all Americans
Except “states” don’t pay income taxes to the federal government. They do get money from the federal government, so in that sense all states are takers.
User avatar
Toonces
Posts: 919
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 9:52 pm

Re: New York and California loses over 90 billion

Post by Toonces »

JoeMemphis wrote: Tue May 30, 2023 11:50 am Except “states” don’t pay income taxes to the federal government. They do get money from the federal government, so in that sense all states are takers.
Total income tax sent to the federal government. The government either sends less or more than was sent in.

https://www.moneygeek.com/living/states ... overnment/

If we were to compare the number of SNAP recipients, California has the most which isn't surprising, considering they are the most populous state. Based on some questionable calculations, 9.6% of California residents are on SNAP whereas 12.3% of North Carolinians.

Now, obviously, there are a lot of variables here, so it's not reasonable to make any explicit determinations about the people in either state

We could do a comparison of GDP. California leads, by far, over second-place Texas. GDP per capita is Washington DC, NY, MA, ND, and WA. Interestingly, GDP growth between 21-22, Tennessee was first followed by New Hampshire and California

Again, it's not always comparing apples to apples. The entire point is that creating "wars" between states is stupid.
User avatar
Number6
Posts: 3476
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 7:18 pm

Re: New York and California loses over 90 billion

Post by Number6 »

Toonces wrote: Tue May 30, 2023 1:08 pm Total income tax sent to the federal government. The government either sends less or more than was sent in.

https://www.moneygeek.com/living/states ... overnment/

If we were to compare the number of SNAP recipients, California has the most which isn't surprising, considering they are the most populous state. Based on some questionable calculations, 9.6% of California residents are on SNAP whereas 12.3% of North Carolinians.

Now, obviously, there are a lot of variables here, so it's not reasonable to make any explicit determinations about the people in either state

We could do a comparison of GDP. California leads, by far, over second-place Texas. GDP per capita is Washington DC, NY, MA, ND, and WA. Interestingly, GDP growth between 21-22, Tennessee was first followed by New Hampshire and California

Again, it's not always comparing apples to apples. The entire point is that creating "wars" between states is stupid.
Interesting link. Key findings from it are:
-7 of the 10 states most dependent on the federal government were Republican-voting, with the average red state receiving $1.05 per dollar spent.
- Twenty-nine states sent more to the federal government than they received, compared to just nine states in 2021.
- Of the states that sent more than they received, 52% were Democrat-voting and 48% were Republican-voting.
- New Mexico had the highest return on federal spending of any state ($3.69), and Delaware had the lowest ($0.32).
Interesting that glenn loves to talk about how bad California and New York are but from your link, South Carolina is ranked 14th most dependent of receiving federal money whereas California is 48th and New York is 36th. It's strange that the person from a Welfare Queen state (a state dependent upon federal funds) would make this comparison.

Also, consider the fact California has the fifth largest GDP in the world and could soon pass Germany to have the fourth largest GDP.
When you vote left, you vote right.
JoeMemphis

Re: New York and California loses over 90 billion

Post by JoeMemphis »

Toonces wrote: Tue May 30, 2023 1:08 pm Total income tax sent to the federal government. The government either sends less or more than was sent in.

https://www.moneygeek.com/living/states ... overnment/

If we were to compare the number of SNAP recipients, California has the most which isn't surprising, considering they are the most populous state. Based on some questionable calculations, 9.6% of California residents are on SNAP whereas 12.3% of North Carolinians.

Now, obviously, there are a lot of variables here, so it's not reasonable to make any explicit determinations about the people in either state

We could do a comparison of GDP. California leads, by far, over second-place Texas. GDP per capita is Washington DC, NY, MA, ND, and WA. Interestingly, GDP growth between 21-22, Tennessee was first followed by New Hampshire and California

Again, it's not always comparing apples to apples. The entire point is that creating "wars" between states is stupid.
I agree the whole notion of payers versus takers between states is stupid.
Glennfs
Posts: 10301
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 12:54 pm

Re: New York and California loses over 90 billion

Post by Glennfs »

Number6 wrote: Tue May 30, 2023 1:34 pm Interesting link. Key findings from it are:


Interesting that glenn loves to talk about how bad California and New York are but from your link, South Carolina is ranked 14th most dependent of receiving federal money whereas California is 48th and New York is 36th. It's strange that the person from a Welfare Queen state (a state dependent upon federal funds) would make this comparison.

Also, consider the fact California has the fifth largest GDP in the world and could soon pass Germany to have the fourth largest GDP.
That is like saying you are a taker because of the income you have received from your service to our country.
Close the military bases and the port in South Carolina. Things that like your service benefit each and every one of us.
" I am a socialist " Bernie Sanders
gounion
Posts: 17242
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 4:59 pm

Re: New York and California loses over 90 billion

Post by gounion »

JoeMemphis wrote: Tue May 30, 2023 11:50 am Except “states” don’t pay income taxes to the federal government. They do get money from the federal government, so in that sense all states are takers.
What stupid shit.
User avatar
Number6
Posts: 3476
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 7:18 pm

Re: New York and California loses over 90 billion

Post by Number6 »

Glennfs wrote: Tue May 30, 2023 3:39 pm That is like saying you are a taker because of the income you have received from your service to our country.
Some people might say that but not me. Here's the reason. Military pay or a military pay is covered by federal law that Congress establishes. You serve in the military and you get paid for it. Your daughter joined the reserves and was paid during the time she spent on reserve duty and training. As for the military pension, I signed an enlistment contract each time I reenlisted and/or extended my service commitment. As part of federal law, once I met the minimum requirements for retirement, and upon retirement, I would be guaranteed a monthly income along with other benefits. So no, I'm not a taker.

Now the link Toonces posted showed how much money went directly to the states, not individuals like me. So those states that received more money than they sent are taker states.
Close the military bases and the port in South Carolina. Things that like your service benefit each and every one of us.
The military is specifically authorized by the U.S. Constitution Article 1, Section 8 to raise an support armies and to provide and maintain a navy. So to to close the military bases and port in South Carolina is a ridiculous statement. First, the naval bases with ships needs to be on the coast to have access to the oceans. Hence, we have Navy bases on the East Coast, Gulf Coast, West Coast as well as in Hawaii. I seriously doubt the federal government owns or controls the port of Charleston.
When you vote left, you vote right.
Glennfs
Posts: 10301
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 12:54 pm

Re: New York and California loses over 90 billion

Post by Glennfs »

Number6 wrote: Tue May 30, 2023 8:38 pm Some people might say that but not me. Here's the reason. Military pay or a military pay is covered by federal law that Congress establishes. You serve in the military and you get paid for it. Your daughter joined the reserves and was paid during the time she spent on reserve duty and training. As for the military pension, I signed an enlistment contract each time I reenlisted and/or extended my service commitment. As part of federal law, once I met the minimum requirements for retirement, and upon retirement, I would be guaranteed a monthly income along with other benefits. So no, I'm not a taker.

Now the link Toonces posted showed how much money went directly to the states, not individuals like me. So those states that received more money than they sent are taker states.


The military is specifically authorized by the U.S. Constitution Article 1, Section 8 to raise an support armies and to provide and maintain a navy. So to to close the military bases and port in South Carolina is a ridiculous statement. First, the naval bases with ships needs to be on the coast to have access to the oceans. Hence, we have Navy bases on the East Coast, Gulf Coast, West Coast as well as in Hawaii. I seriously doubt the federal government owns or controls the port of Charleston.
My point is saying a state like South Carolina is a taker when not considering we are a small state with both military bases and a deep water port.
Is as ridiculous as saying a man like you who sacrificed a major portion of his adult life serving our country is a taker because your income is largely derived from federal funds.
Your service like our deep water port benefits all Americans. To claim either is some example of a welfare taker is equally ridiculous.
" I am a socialist " Bernie Sanders
User avatar
Number6
Posts: 3476
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 7:18 pm

Re: New York and California loses over 90 billion

Post by Number6 »

Glennfs wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 7:07 am My point is saying a state like South Carolina is a taker when not considering we are a small state with both military bases and a deep water port.
It's not just the revenue generated from having military bases in your state but the other monies the federal government sends to South Carolina that makes up part of the state's budget.
Is as ridiculous as saying a man like you who sacrificed a major portion of his adult life serving our country is a taker because your income is largely derived from federal funds.
Yes, my income is mainly derived from federal funds but one thing a lot of civilians don't know is the military helped paid for those retirement incomes in two ways. First, our retirement money is actually funded by our earning less money than our civilian counterparts which helped fund military retirements. Second, we also paid federal taxes on the money we earned.
Your service like our deep water port benefits all Americans. To claim either is some example of a welfare taker is equally ridiculous.
Ports provides revenue for a state and no one is saying the federal government is directly subsidizing the ports, However, if you eliminate the monies from the federal government for the military bases the states still receives a lot of money from the federal government; more than it sends to Washington.
When you vote left, you vote right.
Glennfs
Posts: 10301
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 12:54 pm

Re: New York and California loses over 90 billion

Post by Glennfs »

Number6 wrote: Wed May 31, 2023 6:51 pm It's not just the revenue generated from having military bases in your state but the other monies the federal government sends to South Carolina that makes up part of the state's budget.


Yes, my income is mainly derived from federal funds but one thing a lot of civilians don't know is the military helped paid for those retirement incomes in two ways. First, our retirement money is actually funded by our earning less money than our civilian counterparts which helped fund military retirements. Second, we also paid federal taxes on the money we earned.


Ports provides revenue for a state and no one is saying the federal government is directly subsidizing the ports, However, if you eliminate the monies from the federal government for the military bases the states still receives a lot of money from the federal government; more than it sends to Washington.
Over 500 million

https://www.postandcourier.com/business ... 3d285.html
" I am a socialist " Bernie Sanders
User avatar
ZoWie
Posts: 5108
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 4:39 pm
Location: The blue parts of the map

Re: New York and California loses over 90 billion

Post by ZoWie »

gounion wrote: Tue May 30, 2023 7:29 am Oh, it matters, but it doesn't mean people love conservatism and hates liberalism.

Lots of people took the opportunity to work remotely. But the truth is, California and New York are the centers of business and innovation in the USA. I mean, unlike you, Zowie is honest about the problems California are experiencing. The problem California has had is because of it's popularity, and it's overpopulated.
Indeed, office building occupancy dropped pretty dramatically, and it's still recovering.

California has two problems: climate change and inflation.

These are related, and one feeds back into the other. The major side effect is scarcity of affordable housing, which then creates the illusion of overpopulation. It's not that simple, because you can still get 15 minutes out of the cities and be in what is essentially lightly settled or completely empty country. Housing used to be plentiful in the ever-expanding suburbs, which were fueled by highway construction and mobility, but times changed. This proved to be unsustainable, and nowadays it is clear that at least Southern California and the SF Bay Area actually are full.

Rents rise exponentially, and owning a home is now based on social class, which is a big change from the common concept of California. Cities are full, suburbs are being converted into cities, while streets become ever more crowded, ugly, and ridden with smelly, unhealthy encampments of the thousands who can no longer afford housing. Food and gas prices are also completely beyond the ability of the middle class to cover without cutting somewhere else, and so the economy continues to deteriorate. The numbers which get quoted on TV do not reflect the true situation, which for most people involves running ever faster to stay in the same place, while at the same time the media continue to glorify wealth and fame.

Notice that I didn't put taxation on the problem list. It is not a disease, it is a symptom.

People are out of sorts, scared, and barely aware of the reasons why, since they are kept ignorant as useful idiots for political cliques. Right now the Blame Game is just as pervasive as in the South, as we just saw again with parents duking it out in the streets of North Hollywood over whether alternate sexuality should be even mentioned in the schools. This is odd, because alternate sexuality feels more like an accommodation to the population problem, but it is treated more like an insidious conspiracy to destroy a family system which has already been threatened by economics.
"We must remember that we cannot abandon the truth and remain a free nation." --Liz Cheney, Republican, 7/21/22
User avatar
Number6
Posts: 3476
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 7:18 pm

Re: New York and California loses over 90 billion

Post by Number6 »

ZoWie wrote: Sat Jun 03, 2023 1:03 pm Indeed, office building occupancy dropped pretty dramatically, and it's still recovering.

California has two problems: climate change and inflation.

These are related, and one feeds back into the other. The major side effect is scarcity of affordable housing, which then creates the illusion of overpopulation. It's not that simple, because you can still get 15 minutes out of the cities and be in what is essentially lightly settled or completely empty country. Housing used to be plentiful in the ever-expanding suburbs, which were fueled by highway construction and mobility, but times changed. This proved to be unsustainable, and nowadays it is clear that at least Southern California and the SF Bay Area actually are full.

Rents rise exponentially, and owning a home is now based on social class, which is a big change from the common concept of California. Cities are full, suburbs are being converted into cities, while streets become ever more crowded, ugly, and ridden with smelly, unhealthy encampments of the thousands who can no longer afford housing. Food and gas prices are also completely beyond the ability of the middle class to cover without cutting somewhere else, and so the economy continues to deteriorate. The numbers which get quoted on TV do not reflect the true situation, which for most people involves running ever faster to stay in the same place, while at the same time the media continue to glorify wealth and fame.

Notice that I didn't put taxation on the problem list. It is not a disease, it is a symptom.

People are out of sorts, scared, and barely aware of the reasons why, since they are kept ignorant as useful idiots for political cliques. Right now the Blame Game is just as pervasive as in the South, as we just saw again with parents duking it out in the streets of North Hollywood over whether alternate sexuality should be even mentioned in the schools. This is odd, because alternate sexuality feels more like an accommodation to the population problem, but it is treated more like an insidious conspiracy to destroy a family system which has already been threatened by economics.
One thing cities are looking at is converting empty office buildings, usually in strip malls, into housing. This would also require some modification to zoning regulations. The biggest problem in California is the availability and affordability of housing. As I've said before, most of the population lives in a 50-mile corridor of land, primarily in Southern California, between the mountains and the Pacific Ocean. This means as more people live and work in this area the limited amount of land available for housing becomes more valuable raising the cost of a home or apartment. This is the marketplace at work.
When you vote left, you vote right.
Post Reply