Cuomo blames federal tax law for $2.3 billion New York state budget deficit

[pamak]

You are a waste of time, clueless and ignoring the questions posed. Expenses of the Federal government have nothing to do with balance

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

The fact that you even require an answer to the question you asked says a lot about you

You asked

"You think states should pay for military bases? How about states paying for federal employees? How about states paying retirement benefits, SS and Medicare? "

The answer is obvious that the states pay for EVERYTHING! Who do you think is paying for the military? If you think it is the federal government, then you are worse than the "socialists" you often scold when they think that when the government pays for social programs these programs are free.

Talking about waste of time...

Sent from my laptop using my fingers

 

[Conservative]

The fact that you even require an answer to the question you asked says a lot about you

You asked

"You think states should pay for military bases? How about states paying for federal employees? How about states paying retirement benefits, SS and Medicare? "

The answer is obvious that the states pay for EVERYTHING! Who do you think is paying for the military? If you think it is the federal government, then you are worse than the "socialists" you often scold when they think that when the government pays for social programs these programs are free.

Talking about waste of time...

Sent from my laptop using my fingers

OMG, federal taxes, not state

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

 

[pamak]

He's talking about the poster you are debating. Not you.

Then my mistake.

But since I have to be consistent, I still believe that substituting arguments with personal comments even against people that disagree with me do not help the conversation. I cannot simply accept personal comments simply because they are directed against a person who debates me. I know how to stand my ground. If somebody tries to be a smarta**, I can return him the favor and even personal commentary. It is not helpful when people who do not participate in the conversation/debate pile on.

 

[pamak]

OMG, federal taxes, not state

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

When you articulate a response in proper English, I will come back at you. I am not into deciphering what you want to say. I gave an answer to the question you thought that I avoided. And the question you asked was

"You think states should pay for military bases? How about states paying for federal employees? How about states paying retirement benefits, SS and Medicare? "

Since taxpayers pay for everything, then it is obvious that states, through their taxpayer residents, of course, pay for every single federal program out there.

 

[Fishking]

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/cu...for-2-3-billion-new-york-state-budget-deficit

LOL, yep, look what taxing the rich does for one of the bluest states in the nation. It is about damn time that the cost of blue state social engineering and high costs of that engineering comes to light. Keep driving people out of the states, leftists!! the true cost of liberalism now being felt by even rich liberals

Looks like the true welfare states are getting hit.

 

[Conservative]

When you articulate a response in proper English, I will come back at you. I am not into deciphering what you want to say. I gave an answer to the question you thought that I avoided. And the question you asked was

"You think states should pay for military bases? How about states paying for federal employees? How about states paying retirement benefits, SS and Medicare? "

Since taxpayers pay for everything, then it is obvious that states, through their taxpayer residents, of course, pay for every single federal program out there.

Don't worry about it we are done, state taxpayers should never pay directly for federal expenses, Bill Clinton signing the contract with America

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

 

[Conservative]

Looks like the true welfare states are getting hit.

What the hell is a welfare state?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

 

[pamak]

~~~~~~
New Yorkers pay sky-high local income and property taxes because that’s what he and other elected officials want. Surely, other states provide most of the same services — but without spending anywhere near as much, and thus without taxpayers footing so high a bill. If wealthy New Yorkers choose to flee to states where officials make more sensible decisions about taxes, Cuomo’s ability to finance that lavish spending vanishes, blowing a big hole in his budget. Maybe it’s time for Albany “leaders” to start making decisions that benefit all New Yorkers — not just their political allies.

If other states, provide the same service then why do they need more help from the federal government compared to the high income and property tax states?
Also, the driving factor of cost of living (and taxes) in both NY and CA is housing. In my area, near SF, people pay something like 2,000 per month to rent a studio. For a small two-bedroom apartment the cost can be somewhere around 3,500. Such prices is the result of a very high population density and a very high demand which increases housing prices. Obviously, wayy more people want to live in NY than in some parcel of desert land in Texas. In turn, more expensive houses generate higher property taxes. There is also the issue that such places attract many foreigners with advanced degrees (Palo Alto is at the center of the IT Industry in CA and full of well payed engineers who drive price and cost of living high). In such places, a common worker without an advanced degree cannot afford to live without getting a relative high level of income.

 

[pamak]

Don't worry about it we are done, state taxpayers should never pay directly for federal expenses, Bill Clinton signing the contract with America

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

State taxpayer residents pay directly or indirectly for every federal expense. And the same people receive directly or indirectly federal funds.

 

[Fishking]

What the hell is a welfare state?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

When calculating how much funding the various states get from the federal government vs how much they pay, it doesn't count the SALT deduction which, in itself, represents a federal subsidy.

 

[pamak]

When calculating how much funding the various states get from the federal government vs how much they pay, it doesn't count the SALT deduction which, in itself, represents a federal subsidy.

The SALT simply determines how much a taxpayer pays in federal taxes. More State and Local Tax deductions means paying less federal income taxes. STILL, even when one has more state and local tax deductions which helps him pay less federal taxes, AS LONG AS he overall receives less federal funds than what he contributes through his federal taxes, he is NOT subsidized in any way. On the contrary, he contributes more to the federal coffers than what he receives back. So, he is a "donor", and his donation is directed through the federal government to recipients in other states. Thus, by simply lowering SALT deductions for taxpayers in "donor" blue states, you just increase their federal taxes and effectively increase their "donation."

 

[Doc91478]

If other states, provide the same service then why do they need more help from the federal government compared to the high income and property tax states?
Also, the driving factor of cost of living (and taxes) in both NY and CA is housing. In my area, near SF, people pay something like 2,000 per month to rent a studio. For a small two-bedroom apartment the cost can be somewhere around 3,500. Such prices is the result of a very high population density and a very high demand which increases housing prices. Obviously, wayy more people want to live in NY than in some parcel of desert land in Texas. In turn, more expensive houses generate higher property taxes. There is also the issue that such places attract many foreigners with advanced degrees (Palo Alto is at the center of the IT Industry in CA and full of well payed engineers who drive price and cost of living high). In such places, a common worker without an advanced degree cannot afford to live without getting a relative high level of income.

~~~~~~
Obviously you don't reside in NYC or other areas of NY State. As a life long resident of Brooklyn and Queens my taxes have been high and restrictive. When I retired, I thought taxes would be easier 'upstate' so I moved and now live in the Southern Tier of NY. My Real Restate Taxes and School Taxes are higher now than they've ever been. I'm retire and pay more than $6,000 a year in taxes sales tax not included.

 

[Jezcoe]

The SALT simply determines how much a taxpayer pays in federal taxes. More State and Local Tax deductions means paying less federal income taxes. STILL, even when one has more state and local tax deductions which helps him pay less federal taxes, AS LONG AS he overall receives less federal funds than what he contributes through his federal taxes, he is NOT subsidized in any way. On the contrary, he contributes more to the federal coffers than what he receives back. So, he is a "donor", and his donation is directed through the federal government to recipients in other states. Simply, lowering SALT deductions will simply increase his federal taxes and effectively increase his "donation."

One can speak of an individual, but in the aggregate, the wealthy blue states send more dollars to the Federal Government then it gets back.

The reduction of the SALT deduction l.... for individuals mind you not corporations... means that the aggregate will be sending even more dollars than they get back.

 

[pamak]

One can speak of an individual, but in the aggregate, the wealthy blue states send more dollars to the Federal Government then it gets back.

The reduction of the SALT deduction l.... for individuals mind you not corporations... means that the aggregate will be sending even exporting more dollars than they get back.

Bold mine!.

Yep! This is why I said that one needs to see the big picture. His argument that a person who earns 100,000 in a low-income-tax state pays more federal taxes than a person who earns the same amount in a high income is correct. . However, this "excess" of taxes is not directed to high-income-tax blue states because, as it was shown, these states pay more to the federal government than what they receive back.This "excess" of taxes is directed to poor red states which have a very high percentage of population which needs federal assistance which is often the result of low minimum wage state laws, weaker unions, and weaker worker rights in general.

 

[Jezcoe]

~~~~~~
Obviously you don't reside in NYC or other areas of NY State. As a life long resident of Brooklyn and Queens my taxes have been high and restrictive. When I retired, I thought taxes would be easier 'upstate' so I moved and now live in the Southern Tier of NY. My Real Restate Taxes and School Taxes are higher now than they've ever been. I'm retire and pay more than $6,000 a year in taxes sales tax not included.

Are those local or state taxes if you don’t mind me asking.

I have lived in Brooklyn for 22 years.

I have property in Maine... not exactly the wealthiest of States and my property taxes there are from the localities, not the State.

 

[pamak]

~~~~~~
Obviously you don't reside in NYC or other areas of NY State. As a life long resident of Brooklyn and Queens my taxes have been high and restrictive. When I retired, I thought taxes would be easier 'upstate' so I moved and now live in the Southern Tier of NY. My Real Restate Taxes and School Taxes are higher now than they've ever been. I'm retire and pay more than $6,000 a year in taxes sales tax not included.

What exactly is your disagreement?
Of course, over time, property taxes in general increase. We have inflation! ,
My comparison of the expensive housing in Blue coast and the inexpensive Housing in the Red States was based on the fact that population density and demand among them is wildly different. I think we can agree that when demand rises while supply remains the same (which is shown by the population density figures), you would expect to see a vast difference in the housing cost

https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_population_density

View attachment 67249765

 

[pamak]

I think individuals cases cannot be used to see a general trend. Take for example the recent case with Amazon's decision to build its HQ in a certain locality in NY. I have nt followed the details closely, but I would expect to see a big increase of the housing cost in that area. In other localities, specific events may decrease the housing value (say a company closes a factory or whatever. But overall, I do not understand why somebody would expect that housing cost and taxes would become somehow less expensive. Chances are that most probably will go higher. In fact, over time I think in general that housing will increasingly become less affordable. There is too much investment from rich people around the world who want a piece of land in places like NY or LA or SF. I am about half-hour driving from Stanford. We often talk here about the Asian students who come from abroad and their parents (often wealthy) buy IN CASH houses with an average cost of about 2 million. In my area, without cash you simply cannot buy a house!

 

[Jezcoe]

I think individuals cases cannot be used to see a general trend. Take for example the recent case with Amazon's decision to build its HQ in a certain locality in NY. I have nt followed the details closely, but I would expect to see a big increase of the housing cost in that area. In other localities, specific events may decrease the housing value (say a company closes a factory or whatever. But overall, I do not understand why somebody would expect that housing cost and taxes would become somehow less expensive. Chances are that most probably will go higher. In fact, over time I think in general that housing will increasingly become less affordable. There is too much investment from rich people around the world who want a piece of land in places like NY or LA or SF. I am about half-hour driving from Stanford. We often talk here about the Asian students who come from abroad and their parents (often wealthy) buy IN CASH houses with an average cost of about 2 million. In my area, without cash you simply cannot buy a house!

That is another thing about the large population centers in and around wealthy areas. The money that is competing for proof is on an international scale and in a good percentage of those cases the money isn’t even legit.

 

[Moderate Right]

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/cu...for-2-3-billion-new-york-state-budget-deficit



LOL, yep, look what taxing the rich does for one of the bluest states in the nation. It is about damn time that the cost of blue state social engineering and high costs of that engineering comes to light. Keep driving people out of the states, leftists!! the true cost of liberalism now being felt by even rich liberals

The solution is simple. New York could institute a wealth tax or increase the top rate to 70%. That'll fix the problem. But I am a little confused. Liberals say to tax the rich more so when the Trump tax cuts tax the rich more, they complain. Is there one of those emojie things for scratching the head?

 

[pamak]

That is another thing about the large population centers in and around wealthy areas. The money that is competing for proof is on an international scale and in a good percentage of those cases the money isn’t even legit.

Yep!

A lot of times it is about money laundering coming from abroad

 

[MTAtech]

I don't know exactly how NY state taxpayers calculate their income tax liability to NY; however, I suspect that they "piggy-backs" their state income tax calculation off of 1040 AGI or 1040 taxable income. If that's the case, then TCJA provisions that lower either of those values will lower NY state tax revenue and it'll have nothing to do with whether wealthy people move from or remain in (as residents, proprietors, or employees) NY state.


New York state's rich folks overwhelmingly with regard to the totality of NY's wealthy residents, live in NYC, which is literally a stone's throw from New Jersey, which itself offers places for wealthy people to live. Also, Philly is a 45 minute train ride from Manhattan, which is where most of NY's wealthy people work. Lastly, NYC residents (rich and poor alike) are, unlike folks in most of the rest of the country, quite comfortable with using public transportation, so the prospect of having to take a train to work isn't a big deal.

Accordingly, NYC, the state's primary source suffers from the unique geographical circumstance of it being very easy for folks (frankly, of all income levels) to simply move. Moving won't obtain one who moves yet continues to work in NY any reduction in the taxes they pay to NY; however, they may find their own state's taxable income/taxes reduced by the portion of income or state income taxes attributable to NY.

The big reduction comes in moving from NYC to someplace other than NYC. The reason is that NYC directly imposes its own income tax. That it does may very well inspire folks to move to NJ, even though NJ is also a high tax state. Similarly, the federal cap on the SALT deduction adversely affects real-property-owning NY residents of all income levels, but especially in high income areas, because, in general property values are higher; thus property taxes are higher, even when NY's property tax rate is no different than the rate in lower property-value locales.


The point of the above is that the primary drivers to the decrease in NY state tax revenues can very well derive predominantly from federal income tax changes regardless of NY state's tax structure (including its various tax rates).

I think you are right. There is also a little fact that the OP doesn't realize -- lowering their taxes isn't the most important aspect in life for rich people. There is an apartment in NYC that recently sold for $150 million. Someone who can afford that amount of money for an apartment isn't going to move to Mississippi to save on taxes. Rich people want to live in vibrant cities and taxes don't scare them away.

 

[trouble13]

Capping SALT deductions seems like something the Democrats would be arguing for, not against. It's just a way of closing a loophole on the evil rich who were living in high tax states to avoid paying their share of the federal tax burden that they owe.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

[Xelor]

I think you are right. There is also a little fact that the OP doesn't realize -- lowering their taxes isn't the most important aspect in life for rich people. There is an apartment in NYC that recently sold for $150 million. Someone who can afford that amount of money for an apartment isn't going to move to Mississippi to save on taxes. Rich people want to live in vibrant cities and taxes don't scare them away.

Oh, most definitely. At some point, one knows tax-frugality isn't what drives one's decision about where to live or work. I can't put a specific figure to that point, but I'm pretty sure that it's well below $150M home purchase price (or assessed property value) mark. LOL

 

[pamak]

The solution is simple. New York could institute a wealth tax or increase the top rate to 70%. That'll fix the problem. But I am a little confused. Liberals say to tax the rich more so when the Trump tax cuts tax the rich more, they complain. Is there one of those emojie things for scratching the head?

Bold mine.

If these increased taxes were going back to the same liberal states, then I suspect that there would be less complain by the liberals in the blue states. One problem is that this increase of taxes is directed towards other states. A second problem is that it makes it more difficult for the blue states to increase the tax of their wealthy residents to address blue state needs.

 

[washunut]

Oh, most definitely. At some point, one knows tax-frugality isn't what drives one's decision about where to live or work. I can't put a specific figure to that point, but I'm pretty sure that it's well below $150M home purchase price (or assessed property value) mark. LOL

Seems like both of you are wrong. Lets remember that we don't have to be talking about all rich people,just some. Someone who lives in the NE and has significant income or wealth may already have property in Florida for example. So to be a legal resident of Florida rather than NY,NJ or CT you need to spend six months and a day there. Not for everyone that is true. It doesn't take everyone to take a big bite out of the tax revenues of these states.

Pretty easy for a hedge fund manager to "move" his/her headquarters. Spending the winter plus a few months is not exactly a hardship for some.