BenedictGomez
Well-known member
Well ...Northampton Co. is much closer to Blue Mountain...on the border.
Is it nice there? I know Lehigh County and Bucks County pretty well (they're both beautiful). I dont know much about Northampton.
Welcome to AlpineZone, the largest online community of skiers and snowboarders in the Northeast!
You may have to REGISTER before you can post. Registering is FREE, gets rid of the majority of advertisements, and lets you participate in giveaways and other AlpineZone events!
Well ...Northampton Co. is much closer to Blue Mountain...on the border.
As I said before in this thread, it's obviously not the only thing that drives people's decision to move to/from one state to another.
However, just for fun, lets assume I did say exactly that......... the fact that you could pick out an example that doesn't conform perfectly to the IRS statistics, doesn't invalidate the entire depiction of the IRS/Census data pull. I think any fair-minded person who takes a good hard look at that map (assuming they're well-informed about relative taxation rates as well as cost of living by state) would be pretty struck by just how tight of a correlation it depicts. Outliers? Sure. But for the most part it's pretty darn good.
So why are people leaving Ohio? I don't know. If I had to speculate I'd say it's due to the fact that Ohio has been ravaged by the decline of manufacturing jobs for the last few decades, and the collapse of the US auto industry. It's made a bit of a comeback recently, but that state experienced a LOT of job loss in the last 10 or so years.
Ohio is a very moderate state that voted for Obama twice, Bush twice, Clinton twice, Reagan twice, and Carter.
It's about as purple as a state can possibly get, perhaps the most purple state in all of America, but either way, it's certainly not a "conservative" state.
Is it nice there? I know Lehigh County and Bucks County pretty well (they're both beautiful). I dont know much about Northampton.
Thank GOD that rail tunnel didn't get built. What an EPIC boondoggle that was going to be,. It would have made Boston's Big Dig look like a Girl Scout Cookie bake sale. As I said, I'm not a huge CC fan, but that's one of my favorite things he did.
And even if you pretend NONE of the above were true, WTH should a preponderance of New Jersey citizens have to massively pay for one of the largest expenses in the history of the state that so relatively few would utilize? Good grief, of all the things people could single out, that's the last one I'd criticize him for. The reality is the New Jersey State Democratic Party was butthurt because they lost out on Billions (literally) of dollars in handouts and political payoffs to their friends, their political cronies, and most of all, the Unions who would have profited the most.
good luck with your property values when your state doesnt invest in future growth. fwiw-I live in westchester 35 miles from midtown and the train takes 45 minutes to grand central. from NJ, 10-15 miles to penn station takes an hour because there is no capacity in the lone tunnel that was built 100 years ago.
and you are misrepresenting the facts. the feds were paying 70% of the cost of the tunnel. I can't say in this public forum how I know this, but trust me, christie killed the tunnel to use the money to cover the operating deficit. typical republican shenanigans of shortchanging capital investments. looks good in the short term, though.
Yes, that's it. You're onto them and their conspiracy!
Alternative energy is so wildly successful (massive sarcasm) that "Big Oil" is intentionally cratering the price of oil on purpose. That really makes sense...........
you are misrepresenting the facts. the feds were paying 70% of the cost of the tunnel.
I'll be moving back to PA this winter. I can't justify paying twice as much in COL for exactly the same things I'd have across the Delaware. It means a 45 minute commute into work, but to me its a fair trade off especially with gas prices falling like they are.
No other state seems to have the expenditure issues NJ does.
I grew up off of 78, and the 5pm traffic pattern is NOTHING like when I was a kid. Now it starts at 4:15pm, and whereas 78 West used to be empty, now it's nothing buy cars with PA plates heading home. New Jersey's high taxes have turned parts of Eastern Pennsylvania into something of a late-19th century wild west boomtown. Funny thing is, Pennsy isnt a low tax state, but compared to Jersey it seems like a dream.
I grew up off of 78, and the 5pm traffic pattern is NOTHING like when I was a kid. Now it starts at 4:15pm, and whereas 78 West used to be empty, now it's nothing buy cars with PA plates heading home. New Jersey's high taxes have turned parts of Eastern Pennsylvania into something of a late-19th century wild west boomtown. Funny thing is, Pennsy isnt a low tax state, but compared to Jersey it seems like a dream.
Sounds like you all need to invest in public transportation in a big way down in NJ. Boston does as well and there are plans to vastly expand T service to growing suburb areas. We shall see when the investment is made.
or people could move to the tax free promise lands of Charlotte or Atlanta and sit in similar traffic that's on 8 lane super highways with garbage public transit.
Yes, I live in low tax NH. Guess what? The amount of road infrastructure projects going on around the seacoast right now are the biggest in decades. Preparing for the future. Needs to be done.
The thing is, NJ has great public transit, but getting into NYC presents a massive bottleneck. You've got to get under the Hudson which means going down to two tracks in the old Pennsy tunnels. Plus, those tubes are 100 years old and should be taken out of service to be rehabbed. As it stands you've got to reduce speed and there's often shutdowns because of equipment failures in the tunnel.
I really don't mind the commute. I'm working on my PhD and I only have 2 years or so left on it, so its not like I'll be doing this forever. Afterwards I'll either look for a job in PA or move north.
Or maybe Switzerland... I hear its a great place to be for biotech, but I suppose I'd have to learn German...
I'll contribute to this thread being way off-topic:
A) New Jersey needs more train tunnel access to Manhattan. I am a fan of improved public transportation. Spend some time in Europe and you will see how awful our infrastructure is.
B) It's an unfortunate reality that we don't have regional (non-political border) taxation mechanisms for this type of project. In other words, tax the region that would benefit from the link regardless of where state lines lie.
C) As far as highways are concerned, there is ample research to show that they are self-defeating. When highways get clogged, people stop moving to the affected area. When you build more capacity, more people move in and eventually clog the highway just as much. This is one reason we have so much sprawl. Blindly building extra highway capacity just doubles-down on prior poor urban planning decisions. I'm not saying that it should never happen. I'm just saying that adding capacity should not be automatically assumed to be a good idea.
D) Does the failure to build an extra tunnel really affect property values that much? I'm not convinced that it affects it as much as people think. With extra rail capacity will come extra construction. Real estate values depend on supply and demand and it's naive to think that supply will remain the same.
Yes and no. Yes as far as more people moving into the area and more people using the rail network. No in that a rail network is a much better network to absorb the extra use than a highway network. If people are going to exist, we want more of them using the most efficient forms of moving people.As far as C is concerned couldn't the same be said for rail capacity?
I'll contribute to this thread being way off-topic:
B) It's an unfortunate reality that we don't have regional (non-political border) taxation mechanisms for this type of project. In other words, tax the region that would benefit from the link regardless of where state lines lie.
A better way is to tax the people that derive the benefit from the infrastructure. If you tax only the people who use it, the people who get a benefit but don't actually use it get a free ride.How about tax the people who are using the infrastructure?
A better way is to tax the people that derive the benefit from the infrastructure. If you tax only the people who use it, the people who get a benefit but don't actually use it get a free ride.
The other problem with taxing the smaller subset (actual users) is that the tax would need to be higher. Assuming that the "tax" came in the form of ticket prices, the higher ticket prices would discourage people from using the rail network. We want to encourage people to use it, not discourage.
To be fair, I struggle with the concept of subsidizing mass-transit. But IMHO, the benefits of mass-transit warrant some level of subsidization. The key is to have a set of policies (zoning, etc.) that create actual benefits to public transportation. I'm not sure our policies do that.
Indeed. It falsely assumes that the only people deriving a benefit from the roads are the people who drive upon them. That's quite myopic.Mass has talked about actually taxing people by how many miles they drive to pay for roads which does not play into this thinking well at all.