It's so bad you have to pay people to move to Vermont - Page 7

AlpineZone

Page 7 of 55 FirstFirst ... 5678917 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 550
  1. #61
    Quote Originally Posted by BenedictGomez View Post
    You've obviously never lived in the area. The Circumferential Highway would be quite useful.

    Also, I'm not sure where you're purchasing your flying cars.





    Now that's financial ruin!
    Haha why not just wait to see if Google et al. can really deliver autonomous vehicles first and not waste all the upfront capital expenses (and shoulder all the ongoing operating loses) from a train system?

    Sent from my VS988 using AlpineZone mobile app
    Last edited by eastern powder baby; Jan 3, 2020 at 6:52 AM.
    Ski season is always too short

  2. #62
    Quote Originally Posted by BenedictGomez View Post
    You've obviously never lived in the area. The Circumferential Highway would be quite useful.
    Yeah it would. Williston & South Burlington have exploded with housing over the last few years. Lots of development going on, and in Williston much of that is coming in the form of Townhouses. So these areas are packing people into a small area but doing nothing about the infrastructure (i.e. roads). Know what happens then? Traffic. Bad traffic. It's not quite a nightmare yet but it gets worse every year as these units fill up. I have no issues with expanding housing and development in general for that matter. But it has to be done wisely and right now it's not.

  3. #63
    "Another year, another projected rise in property tax bill.

    An education tax rate letter, released every December through the Vermont Department of Taxes, estimates statewide education spending will grow by $71.5 million during fiscal year 2021.

    With this forecasted increase in education spending is a projected 6% increase in the average property tax bill taxpayers should receive by July 2020."

    -- Burlington Free Press, 5 December 2019

  4. #64
    Perspective - I am a mid-50's flatlander with a second home in SoVt who is seriously thinking of retiring there in the not to distant future. I don't know much yet about the issues with VT, and don't live there, so I appreciate most of the above as it has been enlightening.

    As I read the above and other sources about VT, I have been surprised (disappointed) by the tax situation but completely baffled by the flight of young residents and lack of economic opportunity. And when I think of Burlington, I reject the "cold and remote argument" - there are plenty of remote and cold/hot/rainy small cities in the US that are doing just fine. I agree with the statement above that BTV has "Great Universities, a world class hospital, an airport, highway access and perhaps the best location in New England to be for outdoor enthusiasts to live". These are attributes the young people SEEK.

    I have to think that not capitalizing on these strengths is a conscious decision of the electorate and government. That is fine, but I do not think it is sustainable....
    2018/19 = 36
    2017/18 = 37
    2016/17 = 31
    2015/16 = Depressing
    2014/15 = 28
    2013/14 = 27

  5. #65
    Quote Originally Posted by slatham View Post
    As I read the above and other sources about VT, I have been surprised (disappointed) by the tax situation but completely baffled by the flight of young residents and lack of economic opportunity.
    This is like saying you're surprised by the high cheesecake consumption, but baffled by the lack of weight loss.

    Generally speaking, businesses move to, and flourish in, low tax environs. That's a big part of it.

    The other part is the excessive "extra" regulation Vermont foists upon businesses. What start-up in its' right mind would choose Chittenden County to start its' life? The first several years of a new business are crucial to its' success (or quick death). The flight of Vermont youth is in concert with this lack of jobs & opportunity.

    Frankly, a lot of the high-paying jobs in Vermont are government jobs (i.e. "fake" economy jobs) which Leahy (to his credit or discredit depending on your perspective) parachuted in. Hell, if you removed government workers making $80,000+ from Vermont the state would go into crisis. There are only 2 states in America with more government jobs per capital (HI & AK). And HI is because it's a tiny state with a huge military presence, and AK is because nobody lives there.
    President - Bicknell's Thrush Extermination Solutions (BTES), LLC



  6. #66
    thetrailboss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    NEK by Birth; Alta/Snowbird by Choice
    Posts
    27,899
    Quote Originally Posted by slatham View Post
    Perspective - I am a mid-50's flatlander with a second home in SoVt who is seriously thinking of retiring there in the not to distant future. I don't know much yet about the issues with VT, and don't live there, so I appreciate most of the above as it has been enlightening.

    As I read the above and other sources about VT, I have been surprised (disappointed) by the tax situation but completely baffled by the flight of young residents and lack of economic opportunity. And when I think of Burlington, I reject the "cold and remote argument" - there are plenty of remote and cold/hot/rainy small cities in the US that are doing just fine. I agree with the statement above that BTV has "Great Universities, a world class hospital, an airport, highway access and perhaps the best location in New England to be for outdoor enthusiasts to live". These are attributes the young people SEEK.

    I have to think that not capitalizing on these strengths is a conscious decision of the electorate and government. That is fine, but I do not think it is sustainable....
    BTV is a great place to go to school for sure--especially if someone else is footing the bill. The cost for rent is very high and open units are hard to find due to the fact that so many students live in BTV and everyone else is in that area to try to make any decent living. But after a while it starts to feel like a fishbowl as I can personally attest. Opportunities are still pretty limited though.
    Live, Ski, or Die!


  7. #67
    Quote Originally Posted by slatham View Post
    Perspective - I am a mid-50's flatlander with a second home in SoVt who is seriously thinking of retiring there in the not to distant future. I don't know much yet about the issues with VT, and don't live there, so I appreciate most of the above as it has been enlightening.
    Well, when it comes to housing costs, you're likely part of the problem. The wages even in ChittCo are not, and never will be, on par with the New York or Boston metro areas. Unfortunately, the pressure from flatlanders buying second homes pushes the cost of real estate closer to the metro pricing than to "Real Vermont" pricing (compare somewhere rural and not near skiing, say Corinth, to Granville, let alone Waitsfield, for example).

    Yes, the tax and regulatory regimes have a significant impact, but comparing the tax situation here in Maine to that in Vermont, it seems pretty damn similar (significant income tax, significant sales tax, although I'm not sure how the property tax compares because that was hidden as part of rent for me in Vermont). Compared to elsewhere, it seems like Vermont has the tightest rental market I've seen (Maine doesn't seem as bad, and at least the part of Montana I was in was a piece of cake comparatively), providing the greatest incentive to own (rather than rent) while also making it damn near impossible to save up enough to get there on a middle-class income. If you look at all three states—Maine, Vermont and Montana—the tightest real-estate markets tend to be those with the greatest pressure "from away" (Bozeman, I'm looking at you).

    Yes, building the Circ would probably be a good thing for traffic flow in ChittCo, and it would have been an even better thing three decades ago. I drove from the New North End to Bolton at least five days a week for a couple of years, and trying to get from the New North End to anywhere south of Burlington is a PITA. I don't doubt that a lot of the engineering work done decades ago is now outdated, but people sitting in idling cars in traffic isn't a good thing for them or their environment.

    Some of the tax costs are just a factor of living in a sparsely populated state; it's more efficient to provide services when you have more residents per mile of roadway (think road maintenance, school transport costs, etc). Vermont has a lot of small schools in part because it isn't really productive for kids to spend three hours a day on school buses, and that's what it would take to consolidate a lot of the smaller schools to get more-normal staff-to-student ratios.

    Some of the ever-increasing property-tax (i.e. education) cost is driven by health-care costs. Implement single-payer nationally in a manner consistent with what European nations have done, and you can stem that bleeding. Until then, you're going to see continuing increases. The data prove that our way of doing things (with respect to health care) is the most expensive (by far) in the first world, and it doesn't provide the best results. It's also a huge hit on small businesses and a serious disincentive to entrepreneurship, especially if you have any sort of chronic condition or prescription needs.

    Vermont does a lot of high-tech industry. Yes, losing the chip fab and related jobs hurts, particularly given that a lot of those positions were well-funded, stable and long-term. But I don't think you can throw a rock around Burlington without it landing near a tech company, and the availability of real broadband (i.e. fiber) far outpaces most states with similar quality of life and access to mountains and forests.

    At the end of the day, I'd be running numbers real carefully before moving back, particularly given that my wife is a teacher and the current changes in the Vermont schools could make a huge difference in employment opportunities for her, but a lot of the structural issues with the economy parallel shifts (and issues) in the national economy.
    Disclaimer: Unless otherwise noted, I speak only for myself, unless I'm saying something incredibly dumb, in which case I didn't say anything and you're hallucinating.

  8. #68
    "Property Taxes: Vermont is the fifth highest state, with a mean effective property tax rate of 1.70% on owner-occupied homes (The Informed Vermonter pays way more than this in Randolph)

    Individual Income Taxes: Vermont is the fifth highest state with a top marginal tax rate of 8.95%

    Corporate Taxes: Vermont is the eighth highest state, with a top marginal tax rate of 8.5%

    Sales Tax: Vermont is the 36th highest state with a 6% sales tax rate."

    -- The Informed Vermonter, 29 September 2017

  9. #69
    Quote Originally Posted by Orca View Post
    "Property Taxes: Vermont is the fifth highest state, with a mean effective property tax rate of 1.70% on owner-occupied homes (The Informed Vermonter pays way more than this in Randolph)

    Individual Income Taxes: Vermont is the fifth highest state with a top marginal tax rate of 8.95%

    Corporate Taxes: Vermont is the eighth highest state, with a top marginal tax rate of 8.5%

    Sales Tax: Vermont is the 36th highest state with a 6% sales tax rate."

    -- The Informed Vermonter, 29 September 2017
    ...so it is the property tax that's actually significantly higher, at least according to that article. Vermont may be in the top ten on those first three categories, but if you compare the per-capita numbers to US average per-capita numbers, it's $2,609 per capita vs $2,519 per capita for the national average. That's not particularly significant, although it may diverge more based on income level (Vermont gets dinged in several articles for a high maximum marginal rate, but that doesn't kick in until you're talking $195k/yr in income, where Montana and Idaho, to pick two, both get into their maximum brackets under $20k/yr.

    Property tax (state & local), however, is $2,342 vs $1,451 for national average. As noted in the linked article, that's 61%.

    That also doesn't delve into things like vehicle registration fees and whatnot that are effectively use taxes but a bit harder to compute. My gut feeling is that Vermont is probably better than southern New England in that regard and a whole lot worse than Rocky mountain states (I know it is for motorcycle and trailer registration, at least).
    Disclaimer: Unless otherwise noted, I speak only for myself, unless I'm saying something incredibly dumb, in which case I didn't say anything and you're hallucinating.

  10. #70
    VT is really cheap to register a car at least compared with NH or Maine

    https://dmv.vermont.gov/registrations/fees

    Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 8:44 AM.