Posts Tagged ‘New York’
New York State accounted for the biggest migration exodus of any state in the nation between 2000 and 2010, with 3.4 million residents leaving over that period, according to the Tax Foundation.
Over that decade the state gained 2.1 million, so net migration amounted to 1.3 million, representing a loss of $45.6 billion in income.
Where are they escaping to? The Tax Foundation found that more than 600,000 New York residents moved to Florida over the decade – opting perhaps for the Sunshine State’s more lenient tax system – taking nearly $20 billion in adjusted growth income with them.
Over that same time period, 208,794 Pennsylvanians moved to Florida, taking $8 billion in income.
“Many of these New York and Pennsylvania residents no doubt moved to Florida for the warm weather,” says the foundation, a nonpartisan research group. “[B]ut many more may have moved there because the state does not have an individual income tax, an estate tax, nor an inheritance tax.”
The Tax Foundation has created a “migration calculator” based on data from the Internal Revenue Service, tabulating the number of individuals moving between states each year, and income affected by the shifts.
The calculator shows that 612,520 people renounced their citizenship in New York State and moved to Florida in the 10-year period, taking with them $19.7 billion in adjusted growth income.
Between 2009 and 2010 alone, 40,195 New York residents moved to Florida, taking $1.3 billion in income.
According to the group, New York ranked second among the states for the highest state and local tax burden in 2009. The Empire State was ranked highest for tax burden every year from 1977 until 2006, except in 1984 when it was ranked second.
New York State has a progressive personal income tax rate ranging from 6.45 percent to 8.82 percent for those earning over $2 million. Sales varies by county, and is between seven and eight percent. In Manhattan, the sales tax is 8.875 percent.
According to the Retirement Living Center, which examines tax burdens by state for those nearing retirement, New York also levies a gasoline tax at 49.0 cents per gallon and a cigarette tax of $4.35 per pack, along with an additional $1.50 per pack in New York City.
New York is also one of 17 states plus the District of Columbia that collects an estate tax, with a $1 million exemption and a progressive rate from 0.8 percent to 16 percent.
In 2007, New York State collected $1.1 billion from its estate and gift taxes, the highest of any of the states, according to the Tax Foundation.
California is also known for more onerous taxes and regulations, and the foundation shows similar trends of migration from there to other states like Texas and Arizona.
The Tax Foundation ranked the Golden State sixth highest in the nation for state and local tax burden in 2009.
Between 2000 and 2010, the most recent data available, 551,914 people left California for Texas, taking $14.3 billion in income. Texas has no state income tax or estate tax.
A total of 48,877 people moved to Texas from California between 2009 and 2010 alone, totaling $1.2 billion in income. Another 28,088 from California relocated to Nevada and 30,663 to Arizona, a loss of $699.1 million and $707.8 million in income respectively.
Overall, California had the most departures between 2009 and 2010 – 406,883 people, representing a loss of $10.6 billion in income. Over that year 365,763 people moved there, representing a net loss of 41,120 residents.
Since 2000 1.2 million more people have left California than have moved there, the second biggest net loss, after New York.
Florida, meanwhile, had a negative net migration of 966,934 between 2000 and 2010 – meaning nearly a million more people moved to the state than left. Texas also has a negative net migration – 807,552 – during the same time period.
Florida and Texas rank the two lowest in net migration over the decade, followed by North Carolina, Arizona and Georgia, each of which has a negative rate.
The Tax Foundation acknowledges that taxes are not the only reason to flee a state. “Taxes are one of hundreds of factors that go into a person’s decision to move,” it says on its website. “Others include age, technology, job prospects and the quality/quantity of government services provided.”
The foundation also points out that the migration calculator is not definitive. “A true study that sought to quantify the importance of taxes for locational decisions would need to account for as many other factors as possible, in addition to possible serial correlation issues between variables, especially taxes.”
In a move certain to fuel the debate over Obama’s qualifications for the presidency, the group “Americans for Freedom of Information” has Released copies of President Obama’s college transcripts from Occidental College … Released today, the transcript school indicates that Obama, under the name Barry Soetoro, received financial aid as a foreign student from Indonesia as an undergraduate. The transcript was released by Occidental College in compliance with a court order in a suit brought by the group in the Superior Court of California. The transcript shows that Obama (Soetoro) applied for financial aid and was awarded a fellowship for foreign students from the Fulbright Foundation Scholarship program. To qualify, for the scholarship, a student must claim foreign citizenship.
This document would seem to provide the smoking gun that many of Obama’s detractors have been seeking. Along with the evidence that he was first born in Kenya and there is no record of him ever applying for US citizenship, this is looking pretty grim. The news has created a firestorm at the White House as the release casts increasing doubt about Obama’s legitimacy and qualification to serve as President article titled, “Obama Eligibility Questioned,” leading some to speculate that the story may overshadow economic issues on Obama’s first official visit to the U.K. In a related matter, under growing pressure from several groups, Justice Antonin Scalia announced that the Supreme Court agreed on Tuesday to hear arguments concerning Obama’s legal eligibility to serve as President in a case brought by Leo Donofrio of New Jersey . This lawsuit claims Obama’s dual citizenship disqualified him from serving as president.. Donofrio’s case is just one of 18 suits brought by citizens demanding proof of Obama’s citizenship or qualification to serve as president.
Gary Kreep of the United States Justice Foundation has released the results of their investigation of Obama’s campaign spending. This study estimates that Obama has spent upwards of $950,000 in campaign funds in the past year with eleven law firms in 12 states for legal resources to block disclosure of any of his personal records. Mr. Kreep indicated that the investigation is still ongoing but that the final report will be provided to the U.S. Attorney general, Eric Holder. Mr. Holder has refused to comment on the matter…
LET OTHER FOLKS KNOW THIS NEWS, THE MEDIA WON’T!
Subject: RE: Issue of Passport?
While I’ve little interest in getting in the middle of the Obama birth issue, Paul Hollrah over at FSM did so yesterday and believes the issue can be resolved by Obama answering one simple question: What passport did he use when he was shuttling between New York, Jakarta, and Karachi?
So how did a young man who arrived in New York in early June 1981, without the price of a hotel room in his pocket, suddenly come up with the price of a round-the-world trip just a month later?
And once he was on a plane, shuttling between New York, Jakarta, and Karachi, what passport was he offering when he passed through Customs and Immigration?
The American people not only deserve to have answers to these questions, they must have answers. It makes the debate over Obama’s citizenship a rather short and simple one.
Q: Did he travel to Pakistan in 1981, at age 20?
A : Yes, by his own admission.
Q: What passport did he travel under?
A: There are only three possibilities.
1) He traveled with a U.S. … Passport,
2) He traveled with a British passport, or
3) He traveled with an Indonesia passport.
Q: Is it possible that Obama traveled with a U.S. Passport in 1981?
A: No. It is not possible. Pakistan was on the U.S. .. State Department’s “no travel” list in 1981.
Conclusion: When Obama went to Pakistan in 1981 he was traveling either with a British passport or an Indonesian passport.
If he were traveling with a British passport that would provide proof that he was born in Kenya on August 4, 1961, not in Hawaii as he claims.. And if he were traveling with an Indonesian passport that would tend to prove that he relinquished whatever previous citizenship he held, British or American, prior to being adopted by his Indonesian step-father in 1967.
Whatever the truth of the matter, the American people need to know how he managed to become a “natural born” American citizen between 1981 and 2008.
Given the destructive nature of his plans for America, as illustrated by his speech before Congress and the disastrous spending plan he has presented to Congress, the sooner we learn the truth of all this, the better.
If you Don’t care that Your President is not a natural born Citizen and in Violation of the Constitution, then Delete this, and then lower your American Flag to half-staff, because the U.S. Constitution is already on life-support, and won’t survive much longer.
If you do care then Forward this to as many patriotic Americans as you can,
because our country is being looted and ransacked!
The Wall Street Journal BUSINESS FEBRUARY 14, 2011 By MELANIE TROTTMAN
Robert Glover, right, a local union president, joins a protest against Florida Gov. Rick Scott’s state budget proposal announced last week.
Public-sector unions have begun using their clout against efforts to roll back government workers’ wages and benefits, cut jobs and curtail contract bargaining rights as political leaders from both parties look for ways to cut spending.
Two of the nation’s biggest public-sector unions, which together represent about 2.2 million government workers, are facing a backlash against the rising costs of public workers’ pay, benefits and pensions.
As states and local governments seek to trim costs in a difficult economy, the unions are struggling to defend pay and benefit packages negotiated when times were flush.
Last week, several hundred members of the American Federation of Government Employees, the largest federal employee union, marched to the Capitol from their conference at a Hyatt Regency hotel in Washington, D.C., and delivered petitions seeking to influence congressional debate
“We don’t want to be whining federal employees, but we want to ensure these decisions aren’t made too hastily,” said Terrence Johns, a union member from New Orleans who sought out Sen. Mary Landrieu (D., La.) and Sen. David Vitter (R., La.), among others.
During the conference, union members got tips on contacting local politicians, writing letters to the editor and using social media such as Twitter to debunk what public-sector union officials say is a myth that their members are paid more than private-sector workers.
Leaders of the union, which is known as AFGE, have asked members to contribute more to the organization’s political action campaign fund. “We don’t have a lot of time to try to turn around the American public’s opinion” that public-sector workers are to blame, said AFGE President John Gage. He criticized President Barack Obama’s proposal to save $28 billion by freezing pay for civilian federal employees, and said he wished Mr. Obama “would be standing up more for his employees.”
Meanwhile, leaders of the American Federation of State County and Municipal Employees, or AFSCME, plan to fight proposals in a growing number of states and cities that plan to roll back public workers’ compensation. Union leaders say they plan to focus on meeting with lawmakers, as well as a public relations campaign to showcase the value of government workers.
Government-employee unions maintain considerable influence. About 7.6 million public employees, or 36.2% of all public-sector workers, belonged to unions in 2010, down slightly from the year before. In the private sector, the unionization rate slipped to 6.9%.
In the 2010 midterm elections, public-sector unions contributed $20.5 million to federal candidates, parties and outside groups, up from $19.1 million in the 2008 election cycle, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. The share of contributions to Democrats rose to 92% in 2010 from 89% in 2008.
AFSCME accounted for $4.03 million of the contributions in 2010, ranking third among the top 20 public-sector union contributors. The AFGE ranked seventh at $981,240.
Unions also spend money on political efforts not directly tied to a candidate, with AFSCME reporting that it spent $91 million during the 2010 midterm elections.
With no federal elections this year, AFSCME officials said they will make fighting state battles their top political priority.
Public employees face pressure from such Democrats as New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, who has said he would seek to cut $450 million in employee costs.
In Ohio, the new Republican Gov. John Kasich has indicated he wants to limit unions’ rights to bargain over issues such as work rules that can result in larger overtime payments or require certain levels of staffing. “We have to bring a little bit more control back to the management side of the ledger,” said his deputy director Pieter Wykoff.
AFSCME has countered Gov. Kasich’s proposals in part by backing a recommendation to set a retirement age of at least 55 for many public workers, with a requirement that they work for at least 32 years to qualify for their pension payouts. Under current rules, many such workers can retire at any age as long as they have 30 years of service.
In the months leading up to November’s midterm elections, AFSCME officials pressed Democratic allies to speed or extend contract settlements before the “bad people” took office, said AFSCME president Gerald McEntee, referring to Republican candidates he feared would be tougher on government workers and unions.
But in Wisconsin, the state legislature, controlled by Democrats, voted down a contract for state workers during the lame-duck session after Republicans swept to victory across the state.
Wisconsin’s new Republican Gov. Scott Walker said in an interview that he put “aggressive pressure” on legislators to vote no.
Last week, Mr. Walker proposed that state employees pay more for their health care and pensions, a change to save $30 million and help reduce the state’s $137 million deficit for the year ending June 30. The bill also proposed stripping many state and local workers of most collective bargaining rights, allowing them to negotiate only base pay. Local police, fire and state patrol workers would be exempted from the bargaining changes.
The Wisconsin arm of labor federation AFL-CIO, whose members include many public-sector unions, launched an ad campaign Sunday to protest the bargaining proposal and ask the public to call their legislators to “stop this radical move.”
Wisconsin also faces a projected deficit of $3.6 billion over the next two years.
THE RESULT: At least one infant and one elderly woman died because rescue workers were unable to travel on streets that had not been cleared (not cleared on purpose).
NEW YORK POST: Sanitation Department bosses from the snow-slammed outer boroughs ordered their drivers to snarl the blizzard cleanup to protest budget cuts — a disastrous move that turned streets into a minefield for emergency-services vehicles, The Post has learned.
Miles of roads stretching from as north as Whitestone, Queens, to the south shore of Staten Island still remained treacherously unplowed last night because of the shameless job action, several sources and a city lawmaker said, which was over a raft of demotions, attrition and budget cuts.
“They sent a message to the rest of the city that these particular labor issues are more important,” said City Councilman Dan Halloran (R-Queens), who was visited yesterday by a group of guilt-ridden sanitation workers who confessed the shameless plot.
Halloran said he met with three plow workers from the Sanitation Department — and two Department of Transportation supervisors who were on loan — at his office after he was flooded with irate calls from constituents.
This is how government unions operate. The result of this was at least one baby and an elderly woman died because emergency responders were not able to get through streets that had not been cleared — now we know not cleared on purpose. No help arrived for the infant until 9 hours after the parents called 911. An elderly woman died while waiting three hours for rescue workers to arrive following a 911 call by her daughter. What this union did was the municipal version of treason. Soldiers who act like this are prosecuted for desertion. The executives of this union who organized this form of protest should be prosecuted for manslaughter.
With America’s health care system soon under government control, expect medical care that looks a lot like this.
The Muslim Mosque planned near the site of the World Trade Center attack could qualify for tax-free financing, a spokesman for City Comptroller John Liu said on Friday, and Liu is willing to consider approving the public subsidy.
The Democratic comptroller’s spokesman, Scott Sieber, said Liu supported the project. The center has sparked an intense debate over U.S. religious freedoms and the sanctity of the Trade Center site, where nearly 3,000 perished in the September 11, 2001 attack.
“If it turns out to be financially feasible and if they can demonstrate an ability to pay off the bonds and comply with the laws concerning tax-exempt financing, we’d certainly consider it,” Sieber told Reuters.
Spokesmen for Mayor Michael Bloomberg, Governor David Paterson and the Islamic center and were not immediately available.
The proposed center, two blocks from the Trade Center site in lower Manhattan, has caused a split between people who lost relatives and friends in the attack, as well as conservative politicians, and those who support the project. Among those who support it are the mayor, civic and religious groups, and some families of victims.
The mosque’s backers hope to raise a total of $70 million in tax-exempt debt to build the center, according to the New York Times. Tax laws allow such funding for religiously affiliated non-profits if they can prove the facility will benefit the general public and their religious activities are funded separately.
The bonds could be issued through a local development corporation created for this purpose, experts said.
The Islamic center would have to repay the bonds, which likely would be less expensive than taxable debt.
New York City’s Industrial Development Authority could not issue debt for the center because the state civic facilities law, which governed this type of financing for non-profits, was allowed to expire about two years ago.