Got those blue state blues....

[Peter_Puget]

..or someday I'll borrow tax enough to get out of debt.

 

Total Blue-state employment growth has been only 3.3 percent during the current expansion, which began in November 2001, compared with the U.S. rate of 5.5 percent. Meanwhile, total Red-state employment growth has been 7.5 percent, more than double that of the Blue states.

 

Data Here

Edited September 14, 2007 by Peter_Puget

[ClimbingPanther]

of course, 'cause we all know a blue state job is a government job, and the government has been hurtin' for money with lower taxes, the war, etc. it all makes perfect sense.

[cj001f]

I love living in a blue state. I pay federal taxes to fund the Welfare living red states like Alaska who then bitch about the government.

[Jim]

Where exactly in that mound of data is a comparison of state's national election voting record vs economic growth?

[cj001f]

Where exactly in that mound of data is a comparison of state's national election voting record vs economic growth?

 

In some internet sages blog.

[Peter_Puget]

Go find the blue/red state elsewhere gather data.

 

BTW here is an interesting read from a month ago: http://members.forbes.com/forbes/2007/0813/033a.html

 

 

[Jim]

Another PP non-related linky link. Good dodge. First make a sweeping generalization and then back it up with a data site not related to the generalization. Excellent.

 

Oh and thanks for the Forbes link - you have to pay for it to see the article.

[cj001f]

Another PP non-related linky link. Good dodge. First make a sweeping generalization and then back it up with a data site not related to the generalization. Excellent.

 

Did you really expect anything else?

 

He's the stirrer. The CC.com swizzlestick

[Peter_Puget]

Cj:

About those GE MBAs you think are so hot…I once worked for a Chinese company and we financed a US start up almost entirely by invoicing GE for product far in advance of when we should have per the contract….GE always paid promptly. Go figure.

 

[ClimbingPanther]

I love living in a blue state. I pay federal taxes to fund the Welfare living red states like Alaska who then bitch about the government.

 

i'd be willing to bet at least 90% of welfare recipients vote democrat.

[KaskadskyjKozak]

I love living in a blue state. I pay federal taxes to fund the Welfare living red states like Alaska who then bitch about the government.

 

i'd be willing to bet at least 90% of welfare recipients vote democrat.

 

I'd be willing to bet that many welfare recipients don't vote.

[Peter_Puget]

Funny I just pulled it up and copied it w/o paying or subscribing. Anyone else have a problem? Here it is:

 

The median sales price for the American dream--new house, land included--is $236,000, according to government census figures. The average price--$313,000--is higher than the median. Many new houses are palatial.

 

In Manhattan you can pay nearly the U.S. median new home price for a parking spot. "In Chelsea," wrote the New York Times last month, "eight people are vying to buy one of five parking spaces for $225,000 in a 34-unit condo building on West 17th Street. That translates into $1,500 per square foot." And, no, you don't really own the land.

 

Here's a Blue State irony: In areas where U.S. real estate costs are highest--Manhattan or the tonier parts of Boston, Washington, D.C., San Diego, Los Angeles, the San Francisco Bay Area and Hawaii--taxes are also among the highest. New York City residents face a 6.85% top state income tax and a 3.65% top city tax. High salary earners are hit with a combined 45.5% income tax rate before they start paying sales taxes and property taxes, which add 14% to the cost of living. Some taxes might be deductible, but don't get too cute. The dreaded alternative minimum tax will rise up and smite thee.

 

California state income tax is a gagging 9.3%, and it kicks in at a school janitor's salary of $43,500. California adds a "mental health tax" of 1% if you make more than $1 million a year--a joke on dysfunctional Hollywood, one supposes.

 

Is the higher house/tax overhead in the Blue States made bearable by higher salaries? Only at the very top. The average partner at Goldman Sachs (nyse: GS - news - people ) in Manhattan may pull down $20 million a year, but the average Manhattan income is only 2.0 times the national average. That's pretax. Aftertax, where it counts, Manhattan salaries are only about 1.5 times the national average. But median house prices are 4.2 times as high.

 

Millionaires Cash Out of California

 

The San Francisco Business Times noted recently that Bay Area millionaires are starting to take their gold out of the Golden State. The paper writes: "The Bay Area's wealth boom is producing an explosion of millionaires--in Nevada, Wyoming and perhaps Canada. Advisers to the well-heeled say 'wealth migration'--taking the money and running--is behind a surprising drop in the number of Bay Area millionaires."

 

The annual loss of millionaires from the Bay Area--home to Silicon Valley--knocks this extremely rich and fertile place down near the bottom of the new millionaire list, putting it in the company of Detroit, Pittsburgh and Cleveland. Of course, the middle class has been fleeing California for years. High house prices have been the main culprit. Long commutes and deteriorating public services play a part. But the flight of millionaires is very 21st century. The cause? You guessed it. Taxes.

 

Continues the San Francisco Business Times: "'I'm hearing from more California baby boomers, I need to get out,' said Diane Kennedy, a Phoenix accountant and financial adviser to the wealthy. 'You can still make a lot of money in California. The problem is, then you have to pay taxes on that money,' said Kennedy, who recently helped a California client with annual income of about $1 million save $96,000 annually by making his home in Jackson Hole, Wyo. his primary residence.

 

"'Effectively, you have the state of California subsidizing his relocation through the tax savings,' Kennedy said."

 

I love this story. Not because of what's happening to California. But because it proves that tax rates do indeed influence behavior.

 

Some of the outgoing California millionaires of recent years include Netscape's founder, Jim Clark, who moved to Florida, and Ebay's Pierre Omidyar, who moved to Nevada. More common among Cal expats are small business owners like Dave Barton, asset millionaires trying to live well on middle-class salaries. I wrote about Dave's move from San Jose to State College, Pa. (nicknamed Happy Valley) in my 2004 book, Life 2.0. Dave shut down his machine tooling shop and now designs tooling configuration software. We caught up on my Forbes.com blog last month.

 

Wrote Dave: "There's a lot I don't miss about Silicon Valley and California. It was not a pro-business climate, but it was uniquely pro-startup and pro-innovation. It was in the air; you could literally feel it on your skin. That can overcome a lot. Here in flyover country old money was made in low-risk, long-held real estate. They can't comprehend what a startup does and needs. And don't get me started on the politics.

 

"But looking at my Valley (Silicon vs. Happy) comparison, the raw brain power is here, as it is in other major research university towns, and it's coupled with incredibly low costs and a high quality of life. But the risk aversion is suffocating. What a dichotomy: Our cost structure in the boonies is so low we could handle much more risk, but there isn't the will."

 

Good analysis. Would you prefer low costs or an innovative culture? People pay a higher price to live in Manhattan and the Bay Area. Both teem with cultural richness, creative people, capital and confidence. But with a cheap dollar kicking everyone--janitors included--into higher tax brackets, what kinds of companies can operate there? Google (nasdaq: GOOG - news - people ) can live in Silicon Valley and Goldman Sachs in Manhattan, for now, because each company yanks in more than $1 million per employee. But what if your company's revenue-to-employee number is $500,000? $250,000?

 

Markets decide house prices. People decide tax rates. I have a hunch we'll see a Blue State tax revolt soon.

 

[Jim]

So...back to orginal premise. It may be true, but I can't find a correlation in your link. Waz up?

 

In fact there's no data on economic growth by state, just employment statictics. Got another link maybe?

[cj001f]

I love living in a blue state. I pay federal taxes to fund the Welfare living red states like Alaska who then bitch about the government.

 

i'd be willing to bet at least 90% of welfare recipients vote democrat.

 

define "welfare"

 

Alaska = second highest per capita federal spending = solidly red state

 

It's the Louisiana of the Republican party. Underdeveloped and ridiculously corrupt.

[lI1|1!]

blue states = urban

red states = rural

 

now compile meaningless differential statistics ad nauseum because you have too much time on your hands or think you have a point.

 

next.

 

 

[KaskadskyjKozak]

blue states = urban

red states = rural

 

now compile meaningless differential statistics ad nauseum because you have too much time on your hands or think you have a point.

 

next.

 

 

be careful, or our local typo nit-picking troll will be on your case.

[ClimbingPanther]

I love living in a blue state. I pay federal taxes to fund the Welfare living red states like Alaska who then bitch about the government.

 

i'd be willing to bet at least 90% of welfare recipients vote democrat.

 

define "welfare"

 

Alaska = second highest per capita federal spending = solidly red state

 

It's the Louisiana of the Republican party. Underdeveloped and ridiculously corrupt.

 

by welfare, I meant welfare. apparently, you did not?

 

per-capita federal spending is a pretty silly way to define "welfare-living." more of a semi-accurate measure of population density, maybe.

[KaskadskyjKozak]

I love living in a blue state. I pay federal taxes to fund the Welfare living red states like Alaska who then bitch about the government.

 

i'd be willing to bet at least 90% of welfare recipients vote democrat.

 

define "welfare"

 

Alaska = second highest per capita federal spending = solidly red state

 

It's the Louisiana of the Republican party. Underdeveloped and ridiculously corrupt.

 

by welfare, I meant welfare. apparently, you did not?

 

per-capita federal spending is a pretty silly way to define "welfare-living." more of a semi-accurate measure of population density, maybe.

 

I think it is obvious that people getting free hand outs will continue to support those who butter their bread. And it is equally obvious that those in power use these handouts to bribe their constituents to keep voting them in office.

 

[cj001f]

more of a semi-accurate measure of population density, maybe.

 

nice try.

 

You do know the reason we backed out of our treaty with the russkies over starwars back in the early '00s? It required no installation in Alaska. Stevens & Murkowski had to have the base in Alaska to bring in the bacon.