Not Logged In Log In   Sign Up   Points Leaders
Follow Us    9:30 AM

Message Forum - Read Message

Category: US politics > Topics Add to favorite topics   Post new topicPost New Topic
Author Topic: Why the Middle Class is Abandoning Liberal States Back to Topics
teacher_tim

Champion Author
Maryland

Posts:17,966
Points:782,965
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Nov 1, 2013 11:53:09 AM

"Where are Americans moving, and why? Timothy Noah, writing in the Washington Monthly, professes to be puzzled. He points out that people have been moving out of states with high per capita incomes -- Connecticut, New York, Massachusetts, Maryland -- to states with lower income levels.

“Why are Americans by and large moving away from economic opportunity rather than toward it?” he asks.

Actually, it's not puzzling at all. The movement from high-tax, high-housing-cost states to low-tax, low-housing-cost states has been going on for more than 40 years, as I note in my new book Shaping Our Nation: How Surges of Migration Transformed America and Its Politics.


Between 1970 and 2010 the population of New York state increased from 18 million to 19 million. In that same period, the population of Texas increased from 11 million to 25 million.

The picture is even starker if you look at major metro areas. The New York metropolitan area, including counties in New Jersey and Connecticut, increased from 17.8 million in 1970 to 19.2 million in 2010 — up 8 percent. During that time the nation grew 52 percent.

In the same period, the four big metro areas in Texas — Dallas, Houston, San Antonio, Austin — grew from 6 million to 15.6 million, a 160 percent increase.

Contrary to Noah’s inference, people don’t move away from opportunity. They move partly in response to economic incentives, but also to pursue dreams and escape nightmares.

Opportunity does exist in the Northeastern states and in California — for people with very high skill levels. And for low-skill immigrants, without whom those metro areas would have lost rather than gained population over the last three decades.

But there’s not much opportunity there for people with midlevel skills who want to raise families. Housing costs are exceedingly high, partly, as Noah notes, because of restrictive land use and zoning regulations.

And central city public schools, with a few exceptions, repel most middle-class parents.

High taxes produce revenues to finance handsome benefits and pensions for public employee union members in the high-cost states. It’s hard to see how this benefits middle-class people making their livings in the private sector.

Moreover, Noah’s use of per capita incomes is misleading, since children typically have no income and many in the Northeast and coastal California are childless. If you look at household incomes, these states are far closer to the national average."
http://washingtonexaminer.com/americans-keep-moving-to-states-with-low-taxes-and-housing-costs/article/2538200
REPLIES (newest first) Post a Reply
Profile Pic
MarkJames
Champion Author Albany

Posts:2,296
Points:39,040
Joined:Feb 2008
Message Posted: Dec 6, 2013 12:24:28 PM

The effects of liberal policies are what cause many to leave, or not to move into numerous regions.

Many don't understand the causes, but they sure as hell feel the effects if they pay property taxes in much of New York.
Profile Pic
sgm4law
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:21,543
Points:2,709,430
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Dec 6, 2013 11:00:06 AM

If I lived somewhere for solely political reasons, I guess I'd like to live in Iowa or New Hampshire, where my vote would be courted and I could meet every candidate running in national races.

But that's not enough of a reason to choose to live anywhere.
Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:17,966
Points:782,965
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Dec 4, 2013 1:35:30 PM

"We all have our reasons to live in our own hell.....And demons to fight there"

Gives a whole new meaning to "Hell-o"!
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:17,597
Points:343,800
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Dec 4, 2013 12:25:18 PM

And it's pretty safe to assume that most people have similar reasons for living where they do. Job, family, climate, topography, opportunity, availability of metro offerings, etc.
Profile Pic
PopcornPirate
Champion Author New Jersey

Posts:4,856
Points:1,354,480
Joined:Nov 2006
Message Posted: Dec 4, 2013 10:23:39 AM

""Sounds like we GB's choose to live where we do for other reasons than the predominant political leanings of a region.""

If I could live elsewhere I would. Someplace with allot more open space & conservative attitude....BUT I have a job. My wife has a job. I have a mortgage. I have kids that live here. I have grandkids that live here. I have a small business that is based here....

We all have our reasons to live in our own hell.....And demons to fight there
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:17,597
Points:343,800
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Dec 3, 2013 3:40:18 PM

Sounds like we GB's choose to live where we do for other reasons than the predominant political leanings of a region.
Profile Pic
airfresh
Champion Author Massachusetts

Posts:17,635
Points:1,014,055
Joined:Aug 2007
Message Posted: Dec 3, 2013 9:46:05 AM

I understand why people would leave Massachusetts. The OP states Mass as a higher per capita income state. While that may be true averaged out there's a line of demarcation along the interstate 495 noth/south highway. Those east and those west are in very different places income and opportunity wise. We're probably a bit of a microcosm for the topic. More and more people east are finding housing and cost of living so high they are moving west to take advantage of lower real estate and lower cost of living yet still commuting the hour and a half.

I happen to like the western part of this state. I'm about an hour and a half ride by car to the Adirondacks to my west the Green mountains of Vermont to my north. The Maine and Mass shore to the east. The cities of Boston (east) and NYC (south).

And yet the policies, regulations, taxes, and overall paternal nature of our govt has begun to wear on me for sure.
Profile Pic
PopcornPirate
Champion Author New Jersey

Posts:4,856
Points:1,354,480
Joined:Nov 2006
Message Posted: Dec 3, 2013 9:29:35 AM

""Lol, I didn't say it wasn't beautiful there, but there just ain't much else there besides nature. Wonderfully nice people there; ""

Out of all the states I have been in. Oklahoma has the nicest people. Thet will give you the shirt off their back if you needed one
Profile Pic
MarkJames
Champion Author Albany

Posts:2,296
Points:39,040
Joined:Feb 2008
Message Posted: Nov 27, 2013 9:17:06 AM

I bounce between 3 primary homes, all in what I call semi-rural lakefront locations, yet close enough to my businesses, customers, big box stores, commercial/industrial suppliers, hardware/plumbing/heating/cooling/automotive/lumber stores etc.

Population density is very low as much of the local population is seasonal and many of the homes are camps, 2nd/3rd homes, vacation homes etc.

I own several rural lakefront camps and 3 hunting camps, but would never live there year round due to the distance from the above mentioned businesses and conveniences.

The few local businesses have a very limited selection, plus they're real price gougers.

I don't have broadband and/or cell service at some locations which is a deal killer as well.
Profile Pic
AC-302
Champion Author Los Angeles

Posts:29,021
Points:3,206,760
Joined:Aug 2004
Message Posted: Nov 26, 2013 11:10:24 PM

The Great Plains are beautiful. You get some beautiful sunsets out that way.
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:17,597
Points:343,800
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Nov 26, 2013 6:08:08 PM

I am always torn on this kinda thing. I guess I want it all. I like living in a big metro for the shows, the availability of nearly anything you might want, and having lots of friends to interact with.

I also like to get away from it all, go off by myself and be one with nature.

But I could never do a long commute. Life is too short so decide that I should throw away an hour or two each day simply because I want to live some place that's far away from where I work.

So I live with about 3.5 million others and get away when I get a chance.
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:25,869
Points:1,261,925
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Nov 26, 2013 3:45:48 PM

Steve if its anything less than a three day ride on a good mountain horse from the end of the road --- its still too bloomin close to the big city.

Sometime you have to come out and visit the desert. Keep an open mind and let the peace of the desert enter and make you whole again.

You couldnt pay me enough to live back east in one of them places called cities.
Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:17,966
Points:782,965
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Nov 26, 2013 1:38:41 PM

Lol, I didn't say it wasn't beautiful there, but there just ain't much else there besides nature. Wonderfully nice people there; we plan to stop in on a Western road trip next year.
Profile Pic
KansasGunman
Champion Author Kansas

Posts:21,873
Points:2,113,475
Joined:Oct 2005
Message Posted: Nov 26, 2013 1:32:07 PM

If the weather is descent when driving the RV down to our winter homestead in Arizona we generally take US 54 down through Tucumcari and over to Santa Rosa and then down to Las Cruces NM as it's the shortest route being a diagonal as opposed to taking I-35 to I-40 and then I-25 south to I-10.
Been through Liberal, Guymon and Dalhart many times over the years and yeah it can seem somewhat baron to some inner-city types but we love its isolated beauty.

[Edited by: KansasGunman at 11/26/2013 1:37:35 PM EST]
Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:17,966
Points:782,965
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Nov 26, 2013 12:28:19 PM

My wife has relatives in Guymon, OK. THAT is the middle of nowhere. Check the map. Went there for a wedding a few years back. Flight to Houston, commuter to Amarillo, rent a SUV and drive 70 miles north.

It is just a few miles from Liberal, KS. Home to the original Dorothy's House from The Wizard of Oz and the 5th largest air museum in the U.S.
Profile Pic
KansasGunman
Champion Author Kansas

Posts:21,873
Points:2,113,475
Joined:Oct 2005
Message Posted: Nov 26, 2013 12:20:10 PM

"I am picturing a place with no water, few features, and no geographical reason for anybody to want to be there. Think sand and sun. Lots of both and nothing else. I think you know what I mean."

.....

Better there than living in the squalor of some city amongst the congestion, idiots, gangs, crime and other crud.
We purchased beautiful private and secluded acreage in the rural farming community adjoining the property I owned where my gun shop was located and built our retirement home.
Leaving that cesspool of humanity called a city behind us nearly 20 years ago was the second best thing we had ever done; the first being the homestead property we purchased on the Arizona desert near Florence where we winter each year...and yes the Arizona desert is magnificent and a place of beauty in the Winter and Spring.
Profile Pic
MarkJames
Champion Author Albany

Posts:2,296
Points:39,040
Joined:Feb 2008
Message Posted: Nov 26, 2013 9:14:22 AM

One of the many nice things about the areas where I live is that you only have to commute minutes to escape high population density and all the problems it causes.

What many locals call "the middle of nowhere" is only 10 to 20 minutes to the nearest city.
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:17,597
Points:343,800
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Nov 26, 2013 8:51:23 AM

Those places may be technically in the desert, fly, but they are not what I would call 'the middle of the desert'.

I am picturing a place with no water, few features, and no geographical reason for anybody to want to be there. Think sand and sun. Lots of both and nothing else. I think you know what I mean.
Profile Pic
AC-302
Champion Author Los Angeles

Posts:29,021
Points:3,206,760
Joined:Aug 2004
Message Posted: Nov 26, 2013 1:19:17 AM

I think this quote sums up nicely why the middle class is abandoning blue states in droves:

"Idealism is fine, but as it approaches reality, the costs become prohibitive."
--the late William F. Buckley, Jr.
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:25,869
Points:1,261,925
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Nov 25, 2013 11:36:05 PM

"Like the middle of the desert. But do you really want to live there? There is a reason nobody is there."

Ever hear of Phoenix, Tuscon, Las Vegas adn a host of smaller towns in the desert Steve?
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:17,597
Points:343,800
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Nov 25, 2013 10:00:09 PM

Well, California must be appealing to a lot of people. Because it is so crowded! That is the big reason I would not live there.

Florida has grown a lot, too.

That's a conundrum. If a place is desireable it becomes too crowded. You can find a place with no crowds if you really want it. Like the middle of the desert. But do you really want to live there? There is a reason nobody is there.
Profile Pic
PopcornPirate
Champion Author New Jersey

Posts:4,856
Points:1,354,480
Joined:Nov 2006
Message Posted: Nov 22, 2013 9:32:07 AM

Everyone has to live with their own morals of what is Right & what is Wrong.

I have no qualm if I find something on the ground...and no one is around, keeping it.

Not everyone is Lawful Good or Chaotic Evil
There are grey areas between the 2.
How you live with yourself & others shows where you sit.
So call me greedy for wanting to better myself & have more money, power & influence. I can live with it....can you?
Profile Pic
MarkJames
Champion Author Albany

Posts:2,296
Points:39,040
Joined:Feb 2008
Message Posted: Nov 18, 2013 8:30:25 AM

I have several customers selling and moving due to traffic alone.

Population of their area has been relatively unchanged for decades, however traffic and noise is insane due to commercial and industrial growth, summer tourism etc.

Since main roads are congested, many are taking the side streets through residential neighborhoods to avoid the traffic.All plan on moving outside the city to relatively rural areas.

Property taxes are high as well - around $40 per $1,000 assessed value annually.
Profile Pic
Tru2psu2
Champion Author Winston-Salem

Posts:16,668
Points:1,878,230
Joined:Feb 2004
Message Posted: Nov 17, 2013 4:15:51 PM

We came to NC in 1985 from IL but at the time I wouldn't have said it was because of high taxes. But now we wouldn't go back for that reason and others. It is enough to visit the Chytown area where some of my family still lives once or so a year. The Chicago area is really a zoo-I don't know folks tolerate the traffic!
Profile Pic
Grizdad
Champion Author Montana

Posts:7,208
Points:1,050,405
Joined:Oct 2010
Message Posted: Nov 16, 2013 5:04:06 PM

After 35 years in CA, I had enough. No longer the utopia it once was.
Profile Pic
MarkJames
Champion Author Albany

Posts:2,296
Points:39,040
Joined:Feb 2008
Message Posted: Nov 15, 2013 10:33:20 AM

I'm building my next lakefront vacation home on 200 plus acres in a rural area with one of the lowest property tax rates in the state.

I own other lakefront acreage and building lots minutes away on the same lake, however due to the high property tax rates, if I built a large luxury home there I'd get punished with extremely high property tax bills.

The same applies to other regions where I own acreage. High property tax rates have throttled new construction, expansion, renovation, maintenance, repairs etc.

The high tax rates aren't bad if you own an older run-down home with a very low assessment, however if you own something nice, improve something, or build something new - OUCH!!!

Profile Pic
johnnyg1200
Champion Author St. Louis

Posts:7,002
Points:973,225
Joined:May 2011
Message Posted: Nov 14, 2013 6:35:17 PM

>>>Seriously doubt that political slant is a consideration when relocating.<<<

You may be right that if a state is run by democrats or republicans or who the state went for in the last election probably is not a determining factor when a person decides to relocate. BUT the actions of the elected politicians can be a determining factor.

You couldn’t pay me enough to move to California. High cost of living, heavy EPA regulation on everything, state collages giving illegal aliens instate tuition and assistance that I may not qualify for and the gun laws are enough to keep me out. These are effects of the policies put in place by the politicians.

I have a friend who lives in Illinois. He is getting ready to move across the river to Missouri because of some of the things I just mentioned. He did the math and with the high property tax, income tax, liquor tax, and high gas prices he will save a lot of money just by moving 20 miles and end up in a better neighborhood to boot. I guess that makes him greedy.

People may not choose a state because of the political slant but the law and policies can be a factor.


[Edited by: johnnyg1200 at 11/14/2013 6:35:03 PM EST]
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:17,597
Points:343,800
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Nov 14, 2013 4:40:20 PM

""Never met a greed-o-holic who didn't want to cheat everybody he had anything to do with, the government included. ""

PopcornPirate: "To Coin a phrase... " Greed is Good."
It is a really good motivator to better yourself.
So if you want to call me Greedy for wanting more in my life...AND striving for it with my own effort...So Be it."

--I would only call it greedy if the desire for more outweighs the concern for others. It needs to be balanced.

Greed: noun. a selfish and excessive desire for more of something (as money) than is needed

There is a difference between motivation for betterment and greed. It is the difference between wanting a good life / being willing to work for it while knowing it is possible without ripping off others and thinking that to get ahead somebody else has to be pushed back.

Motivation for betterment says: "If I work for it I can earn it."

Greed says: "If I just figure out how to seperate money from it's owner then I can have it."

It is not greedy to be willing to work for something.

It is greedy to impose a fee for something just because you can get away with it, it's not much, and by doing it to millions of people you will make millions.

It's greedy to knowingly pay people less than they can live on because there are more desperate applicants willing to work for dirt wages; as you yourself roll in the lap of luxury having every thing of your desire and far more money than you could ever spend for the rest of your life.

It's greedy to force all your employees to choose relocation or job loss because you want to upgrade your business and find that it is easier to walk away from aging infrastructure than it is to improve the area you are established in when the business is quite successful enough to make the improvements and endure in the current location.

It is greedy for a billionaire to run a big business which pays the employees so little that many of them qualify for government assistance.

It is greedy to extract more wealth from a local economy than is returned in taxes and wages.

It is greedy to slowly destroy the economy of your nation by exploiting low cost foreign labor to manufacture cheaply priced products (many of the designs for which have been stolen by knocking-off the efforts of American entrepreneurs) to import low-quality products which will spend a short duration as a useful object and all rest of eternity in a landfill as you siphon wealth out of multitudes of local economies and send much of it overseas to pay for materials and labor (thus making the trade imbalance greater) and amass the rest of it in the accounts of a very few individuals such as your own.

It is not greedy to do a fair business for a fair price and contribute to your local economy, thus allowing you to build a comfortable life and home for yourself and support your family and have a nice reitrement.

It is not greedy to want to do a good job in whatever chosen career you like and be a productive member of society who pays their fair share of taxes and volunteers and/or contributes to good causes that help others in need or enhance culture.

It is greedy to find something and say 'finders keepers.'

It is not greedy to find something and then search for the owner and return it.

It is greedy to give millions to a political campaign and expect favors which will make you richer.

It is greedy to be more concerned with getting reelected than with serving those who elected you.

It is not greedy to pay taxes knowing that some of it will be wasted but also knowing that this is reality and inevitable.

It is greedy to expect that all of the taxes you pay will be used only for things you approve of.

It is greedy to game government assistance programs using misrepresentation/lies to try to get more than you truthfully qualify for.

It is greedy to be on public assistance when you know you can go out and find a job and contribute to the public revenue.

It is greedy for capital to consider only the profitability of an idea and not the social and regional repercussions.

It is greedy for insurance to have their hand in every predictable and routine health care transaction.

It is greedy to take billions in profits and play a shell game where you claim to attribute those profits to a seperate business entity in a low-tax offshore office to get out of paying your fair share of taxes to the same USA which has the market you made the billions from.

It is greedy to set up a corporation which pays you very little in taxable salary but reaps you huge earnings as capital gains so that you pay just 13% tax.
Profile Pic
MarkJames
Champion Author Albany

Posts:2,296
Points:39,040
Joined:Feb 2008
Message Posted: Nov 14, 2013 10:15:35 AM

Some of my tenants love where they live in the beautiful mountain foothills on the outskirts of an urban area.

The only rub is that they don't want to send their kids to the poor performing urban school system.

They're currently paying tuition and transportation for 2 kids to attend a much better neighboring school system until they can find a comparable rental, or buy a home in the area.

They pulled their kids out of the urban school system due to disruptive students, bullying, threats, sexual harassment, a 40% dropout rate etc.
Profile Pic
streetrider
Champion Author Gary

Posts:10,239
Points:149,355
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Nov 14, 2013 9:30:20 AM

Seriously doubt that political slant is a consideration when relocating.
Profile Pic
MarkJames
Champion Author Albany

Posts:2,296
Points:39,040
Joined:Feb 2008
Message Posted: Nov 14, 2013 9:23:23 AM

When the trains, trolleys and mass transit were abandoned in favor of personal transportation - cars, trucks, vans, SUVs, motorcycles etc, residents voted with their wheels.

---Many of the poor and low income without personal transportation stayed in the poor urban areas, or flocked to the poor urban areas due to the support systems making many cities worse and many suburban, village and rural areas better.



[Edited by: MarkJames at 11/14/2013 9:23:04 AM EST]
Profile Pic
PopcornPirate
Champion Author New Jersey

Posts:4,856
Points:1,354,480
Joined:Nov 2006
Message Posted: Nov 14, 2013 9:14:34 AM

""Never met a greed-o-holic who didn't want to cheat everybody he had anything to do with, the government included. ""

To Coin a phrase... " Greed is Good."
It is a really good motivator to better yourself.
So if you want to call me Greedy for wanting more in my life...AND striving for it with my own effort...So Be it.
Profile Pic
WES03
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:6,116
Points:1,526,870
Joined:Feb 2009
Message Posted: Nov 14, 2013 9:13:31 AM

Voting with their feet.
Profile Pic
MarkJames
Champion Author Albany

Posts:2,296
Points:39,040
Joined:Feb 2008
Message Posted: Nov 13, 2013 10:10:34 AM

Many have moved out of the urban areas due to criminals and sex offenders alone.

If you look on the Family Watchdog site, most sex offenders are heavily concentrated in the urban areas. The same applies to other crimes.

These offenders need the support systems of the urban areas.

Simply moving 10 plus miles outside the cities eliminates many issues driven by poverty, laziness, joblessness, desperation etc as you generally need jobs, income and reliable vehicles to live there.
Profile Pic
bar1035
Champion Author Charlotte

Posts:11,722
Points:1,631,095
Joined:Aug 2006
Message Posted: Nov 13, 2013 9:27:18 AM

We'll likely be moving to a more friendly state once we retire.
You know, one that will let us keep a little of our retirement funds.
Profile Pic
MarkJames
Champion Author Albany

Posts:2,296
Points:39,040
Joined:Feb 2008
Message Posted: Nov 13, 2013 9:11:54 AM

I'm glad transit doesn't serve many areas where I own properties and that taxis aren't affordable. These things keep out the riff-raff - many, if not most who don't drive, don't have driver's licenses, or can't afford vehicles.

I moved away from many areas to escape population density, traffic, noise, pollution etc.

The things that sound nice on paper - transit, taxis, walkable neighborhoods, affordable rents etc are also large support systems that attract the unemployed, under-employed, unemployable, poor, low income, disabled, criminals, welfare recipients etc. These are major issues in New York where our sky-high property taxes pay for many welfare benefits.

---Before one transit run was eliminated due to costs and numerical justification, they used to park across the road from my store. The riders would hang out in my store parking lot, picnic area, in my store and use my bathroom, trash etc, but never bought much and shoplifting skyrocketed.

There was a nearby apartment complex with mostly welfare and poor tenants that needed the transit as a support system. Cops were there constantly for one thing or another and many had been arrested at my store for shoplifting, or rousted for loitering, disturbances etc.

- --Once transit service ended, the riff-raff had to move to surrounding urban areas with walkable neighborhoods, transit and affordable taxi service.


[Edited by: MarkJames at 11/13/2013 9:12:34 AM EST]
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:17,597
Points:343,800
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Nov 13, 2013 7:48:26 AM

Do you think if they took the subway out of NYC that city street traffic would not be negatively impacted?

How about that train in Chi-town? Could they simply stop running it and expect traffic to be the same?

IF traffic is still snarled after a mass transit project all it does is show that a)it was needed; b)it enabled more people to get more places in the same amount of time; and c)without it sommuting times would be increased.

Effectiveness of mass transit, as you say, depends greatly on careful analysis, planning, design and execution.

But, thanks to inuendos and propaganda such as 'government never does anything right' we continue our sprawl with no mass transit plan. The more built up we get the more difficult it becomes to install an effective MT system. We're losing our chance to be proactive.
Profile Pic
AC-302
Champion Author Los Angeles

Posts:29,021
Points:3,206,760
Joined:Aug 2004
Message Posted: Nov 13, 2013 12:18:54 AM

Way down below, SemiSteve said: "Tampa Bay is a snarl of traffic congestion but Tampans still refuse to pay any more sales tax to set up mass transit such as rail. People can't make jobs work for them if they can't commute. Tampa is one of the largest metros in Florida, a conservative State that takes $1.39 for every dollar pays in federal taxes."

--OK, let's pretend for a second that Tampa builds a "light rail" system, or even borrows and extends the monorail from Busch Gardens. Great. After spending a billion bucks, do you think that the mass transit system will have an impact on traffic?

Chicago has that train that goes from 95th Street on the South Side all the way up to O'Hare Airport on the North. It goes down the middle of I-90 and 94. It's not bad. Ridership is good, but traffic still snarls both morning and night. Why will Tampa be any different?

Here in LaLa land, we used to have streetcars. Ask Jayrad1957 about it sometime. He's very knowledgeable on the subject. Anyway, part of the old system was built into a busway. The ROW had been abandoned for years. The busway is a good idea, but it's not all that great. They're also building a train to Santa Monica from downtown. And all these things will help, but there is one fatal flaw to our system. Everything radiates like spokes from a wheel from downtown LaLa land. But most folks do not live, nor work downtown. If I were to travel from my home to my work it would take me 3 - 4 hours to make the commute (via downtown). I could take what amounts to an airport shuttle, but that would be like $15/day or like $10 each way. I can drive it for that. I daresay that the public transport needs to be VERY well studied and thought out before building, unlike here in LaLa land.
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:17,597
Points:343,800
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Nov 12, 2013 6:19:52 PM

A sadly mistaken analogy equating school grades to currency; based on the conservative myth that liberals in general want all out socialism. The only thing seperating this from reality is the truth. If conservatives would bother to actually check with liberals before putting words in their mouths they might find that liberals do not believe what conservatives think liberals believe. That's why we call them conservative myths.

btw, we're off topic here. Ya wanna take this to the conservative / liberal views thread?
Profile Pic
mudtoe
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:12,380
Points:1,616,940
Joined:May 2008
Message Posted: Nov 12, 2013 2:03:41 PM

tt: "It's like if I take points from every student who earned an A or a B and gave them to students who earned a D or an E, so everyone gets a C. My students were not very keen on this idea. "


It's very interesting, and very predictable, that while most young people consider themselves liberal (or progressive, I always forget what the left calls themselves on any given day), when someone suggests applying the other side of the principles of liberalism to them, they balk.

As a young person they have been on the receiving end of liberalism their entire lives, as their parents and/or the state have provided for all their needs, and thus they have no experience about what it's like to be on the paying end of the wealth redistribution curve. Consequently, most of them think liberalism is great. At that point in their lives the only thing of true value that most of them have, which they have actually worked for and earned themselves, is their grades. It's quite telling that if a proposal is made to "tax" their grades in order to help out other students whose grades aren't as good, they get incensed about such a thing. They often respond that they worked hard for those grades and that there are lots of lazy SOBs whose grades are bad because they don't study, and why should those lazy SOBs be entitled to a portion of the grade that they worked hard for. That's the point at which it's time to smile and say: "Welcome to the Republican Party."


mudtoe
Profile Pic
sgm4law
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:21,543
Points:2,709,430
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Nov 12, 2013 1:44:17 PM

"Sounds like every liberal I've ever met. The most important thing in their lives is other people's money."

Sadly, I've met liberals and conservatives who were that way, and yet, happily, I have also met liberals and conservatives who were not.
Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:17,966
Points:782,965
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Nov 12, 2013 12:19:24 PM

When the middle class realizes that the Democrats are trying to finance everything with the middle class' money, they rebel and move away to protect their hard-earned assets and incomes.

It's like if I take points from every student who earned an A or a B and gave them to students who earned a D or an E, so everyone gets a C. My students were not very keen on this idea.
Profile Pic
mudtoe
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:12,380
Points:1,616,940
Joined:May 2008
Message Posted: Nov 12, 2013 12:15:47 PM

SS: "Never met a greed-o-holic who didn't want to cheat everybody he had anything to do with, the government included."


Sounds like every liberal I've ever met. The most important thing in their lives is other people's money.


mudtoe
Profile Pic
MarkJames
Champion Author Albany

Posts:2,296
Points:39,040
Joined:Feb 2008
Message Posted: Nov 12, 2013 9:55:15 AM

<<Modern devlopement is not built to last.>>

Most new development (which happens outside the cities) will last as long as owners continue to maintain and repair the properties.

Much of this development isn't abandoned, it's retrofitted, or demolished and rebuilt.

The acreage, location and commercial zoning are often what's valuable, not the structures - hence why many large and relatively new structures are demolished.
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:17,597
Points:343,800
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Nov 12, 2013 9:54:35 AM

Never met a greed-o-holic who didn't want to cheat everybody he had anything to do with, the government included.
Profile Pic
PopcornPirate
Champion Author New Jersey

Posts:4,856
Points:1,354,480
Joined:Nov 2006
Message Posted: Nov 12, 2013 9:49:26 AM

The MAJOR reason ANY company will consider moving is the amount of Taxes they are paying at the present location. To how much taxes they will be paying if they move to a new location.

Never met a liberal that did not like raising taxes on those that they think can pay more in taxes........
Profile Pic
MarkJames
Champion Author Albany

Posts:2,296
Points:39,040
Joined:Feb 2008
Message Posted: Nov 12, 2013 9:43:01 AM

Much industry, including my own businesses left cities due to skyrocketing property taxes, plus rules, regulations and zoning as well.

When I moved my first business I was paying higher property taxes on a 2.3 acre city property than I was paying for a 135 acre property minutes outside the city.

My city property was commercially zoned (grandfathered) but surrounding property I needed for expansion was zoned residential.

At the time I owned over 700 acres outside the cities without zoning or deed restrictions.

Many city dwellers (many with the classic "I Got Mine" mentality) only want their cities to be places of living, so they're opposed to industry - especially anything that generates noise or traffic - hence the zoning and deed restrictions.

Many new and existing businesses have "no choice" but to build outside the cities.

In addition, once an existing business outside the cities outgrows it's usefulness, they can be re-purposed, retrofitted, renovated or demolished and rebuilt as they have sufficient space, meet modern codes and have modern infrastructure.
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:17,597
Points:343,800
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Nov 12, 2013 8:29:09 AM

MarkJames: "The majority of commercial/industrial projects moved or were built outside the cities as they needed massive tracts of vacant, undeveloped or under-developed land necessary for massive single story buildings, customer parking, employee parking, tractor trailer parking, boat/RV/tourist parking, shipping/receiving. malls, strip malls, big box stores, super-centers, warehouses, housing developments, apartment complexes, schools, highway departments, jails, prisons, golf courses, parks, recreation etc.

They also needed modern infrastructure - main roads, convenient access to main roads, newer roads, new water/sewer, new electric, new gas lines, new drainage etc.

Our cities were built when people walked, didn't own vehicles and commuted by horse, buggy, sleigh, trolley, train etc, so they've never had the parking, streets and other infrastructure necessary for success. Much of the water/sewer in service today was installed in the late 1800s/Early 1900s.

Much city infrastructure is patchwork - a mix of 1800s to present, all of which is in bad condition and incapable of supporting modern commercial/industrial usage.

Many older city properties were developed long before modern codes existed, so they'd have to be demolished, plus they're also loaded with lead paint, asbestos, mold, chemicals, garbage and numerous toxins in the soil and water. "

--What you have described, MarkJames, is why capitalism frequently builds up only to abandon and move on after a number of decades. Modern devlopement is not built to last. That is not the reason for it. The reason is to make money. When the goal is relatively (in the grand scheme of things) short-term profits we get quick-turn devlopement. When it is time to improve capital looks at the cost to improve what is existing vs the cost of essentially throwing away what has been done (walking away from it) and starting from scratch in a suburban place which was once farmland / undeveloped.

Once the original reason for a city has been outlived (proximity to ports, harbors, rivers, rail lines interstate highways, etc) there is no monetary reason to try to improve what is pre-existing.

That is why capital moves on.

The middle class is then forced to respond by following capital to the new location.

The large cities where factories once thrived also became home to many workers who tend to be liberal. As they prosper and multiply a region becomes more liberal.

And so it is disingenuous to lay the blame on the middle class for leaving a large city abandoned by capital.

It is not that the middle class is leaving liberal States for conservative ones so much as it is conservative politicians slitting the throats of communities they were elected to by slashing taxes to unsustainable levels in order to attract new capital. It may work in the short term but does not stand the test of time.

Once enough capital has been attracted to a region businesses will support many workers who will unite to resist oppression. Since workers out-number titans, the region will turn liberal. Texas is turning liberal. It is only a matter of time until Texas changes color from a red State to blue. It could happen in the next election cycle.

[Edited by: SemiSteve at 11/12/2013 8:29:34 AM EST]
Profile Pic
MarkJames
Champion Author Albany

Posts:2,296
Points:39,040
Joined:Feb 2008
Message Posted: Nov 12, 2013 8:17:19 AM

Moving outside the cities has cost most residents more money due to new/newer construction, higher demand and commuting, however it's a price they're willing to pay to escape the stench, pollution, blight, traffic, noise, poverty, crime, vandalism, poor school systems, slumlords and other negative issues of the cities.
Profile Pic
MarkJames
Champion Author Albany

Posts:2,296
Points:39,040
Joined:Feb 2008
Message Posted: Nov 12, 2013 8:08:47 AM

The majority of commercial/industrial projects moved or were built outside the cities as they needed massive tracts of vacant, undeveloped or under-developed land necessary for massive single story buildings, customer parking, employee parking, tractor trailer parking, boat/RV/tourist parking, shipping/receiving. malls, strip malls, big box stores, super-centers, warehouses, housing developments, apartment complexes, schools, highway departments, jails, prisons, golf courses, parks, recreation etc.

They also needed modern infrastructure - main roads, convenient access to main roads, newer roads, new water/sewer, new electric, new gas lines, new drainage etc.

Our cities were built when people walked, didn't own vehicles and commuted by horse, buggy, sleigh, trolley, train etc, so they've never had the parking, streets and other infrastructure necessary for success. Much of the water/sewer in service today was installed in the late 1800s/Early 1900s.

Much city infrastructure is patchwork - a mix of 1800s to present, all of which is in bad condition and incapable of supporting modern commercial/industrial usage.

Many older city properties were developed long before modern codes existed, so they'd have to be demolished, plus they're also loaded with lead paint, asbestos, mold, chemicals, garbage and numerous toxins in the soil and water.
Post a reply Back to Topics