We all complain about high taxes in New York, and we are justified in doing so.  A recent report by the Tax Foundation paints a bleaker picture for New Yorkers.  They based their report on data from the Department of Commerce Bureau of Economic Analysis showing price-adjusted estimates of personal income for states and metropolitan areas for 2008-2012.  The data shows that a hundred dollars in New York State has the third lowest buying power value at $86.66.  The state with the second lowest value per dollar is Hawaii, and the worst is Washington, D.C..

To put it another way, if someone in Tennessee can buy 100 things at the dollar store for $100, we New Yorkers can only buy 86 items and have a little change left for the parking meter.  $100 is worth 40% more in Mississippi than in Washington, D.C., where your $100 will get you $84.60 worth of stuff.

The report also says that states with higher incomes tend to pay more, which makes the poor in those states poorer than they would be somewhere else.  Per capita income was $53,241 in New York in 2012, and highest in Washington, D.C. at $74,773.  In Mississippi, the state that gets the best value for a dollar, the per capita income was $33,657.  And it points out that these figures are based on state-wide averages.  The buying power in big cities is even worse.

It seems to make sense that people who make more would pay more, and the value of the dollars you have here versus another state would equal out.  Of course that does not happen.  The average wage earner in Kansas makes $9,226 less than the average New Yorker, but has more real purchasing power.  The report points out that people in New York pay higher taxes AND have less purchasing power.  It also notes that because of the inequity poor people in New York may not qualify for welfare while people at the same wage level in another state would.


Frankly I don't know what to make of this.  But I have some ideas.  The first thing that comes to mind is supporting local businesses, including buying local produce.  Why send our money to states that get a better bang for their buck, in a way subsidizing their better lifestyle?

The second thing is that we really need to pressure our representatives to lower taxes and restore school aid in New York.  There is a lot of talk about tax caps and rebates, but what I see is political shuffling that doesn't make New York any less expensive to live in.  Our piece of New York is an exceptional place to live, except for the cost.  Bringing that down would bring it closer to Eden, and would certainly stem the exodus that New York continues to suffer.

From July 1, 2012 to July 1 2013 the Census Bureau estimated that New York lost 104,470 residents to other states.  Despite Governor Cuomo's 'New York is business-friendly' advertising campaign, it is not.  People move where they can work, and those jobs are in states that are actually business-friendly.  In that period New York saw the largest population loss of any other state.  The next biggest loser, Illinois, lost 67,313 people (64.4% of New York's loss -- quite a bump down from New York).  Since 2000 our state has lost close to two million people.  If all of them left New York City -- which has the largest population of any other U.S. city -- its population would be reduced by almost 24%.

Evidently this isn't worrisome to our elected officials.  If it were we'd be seeing real tax reform and real incentives to businesses that make real differences, rather than the feel-good politicking initiatives that look terrific when viewed by themselves, but don't amount to a hill of beans in the bigger picture of state taxes and costs.

On school taxes alone: Two percent tax cap?  Sounds terrific, but the allowed rise in the levy is actually 4.81%.  Rebate on the difference between last year's and this year's taxes? If your home is worth $200,000 you'll get around $143.  Not a significant chunk of the more than $4200 you will be paying.  'Gap Elimination Adjustment'?  Sounds like the state wants to eliminate school budget gaps, but it really refers to the amount of money promised by the State that is far more than it actually sends to the districts.  While some people blame the school districts for spending too much, a lot of the problem is caused by state politicking that threatens to bankrupt some districts.  So yeah, sounds good, but isn't.

Where can you get the most bang for your buck?  Mississippi has the best, but having grown up in Massachusetts I know how difficult it would be to learn to spell 'Mississippi' so I don't know if I could live there.  That's one thing New York has going for it -- spelling it is a no-brainer, even if downstaters do pronounce it Nyu Yawhk.

After Mississippi ($115.74), Arkansas gets the best value, followed by Missouri, Alabama and South Dakota.

v10i31