Post: NYC GROWS AT FAST CLIP

Anyone have any data on population growth for the last 12 months? What I want to know is post Lehman are we losing people net net?

http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/CITY-CENSUS-20090630.html

Just appeared today. Data is only through 2008, I assume through December. About the same rate of population increase. 2009 may be more revealing but we won't have that until the end of the year.

There was another article in the WSJ today talking about cities generally growing at the expense of suburbs, which is more of a long-term trend. But a lot of the growth that article cites is laborers coming to the cities because there are more jobs here then elsewhere. Those are not the typical homeowners though.

Yes, I linked to the chart accompanying the article you refer to because it had data relevant to Jazzman's question. The article is here:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124641839713978195.html

And, malthus, you are focusing on a single paragraph of the article looking at only one driver of population growth. You're being disingenuous by extrapolating further. The article's point was that cities have been better places to weather recessions, for a variety of reasons, especially population density.

"U.S. cities that for years lost residents to the suburbs are holding onto their populations with a mix of people trapped in homes they can't sell and those who prefer urban digs over more distant McMansions, according to Census data released Wednesday.

Growing cities are growing faster and shrinking cities are losing fewer people, reflecting a blend of choice and circumstance."

Choice and circumstance.

Sorry evnyc. Was not trying to be disengenuous. I read the article quickly about 4 hours ago and not in the thought of how it would apply to a thread on streeteasy later in the day. Those were some of the points I took from it.

No worries. When I'm feeling ornery I start being a stickler for details, I didn't mean to pick on you.

"Those are not the typical homeowners though."

True, but they do have to live somewhere and, hypothetically, they will fill-up vacancies in rental units, which will push rents higher, which will affect purchase prices, and so on.

I think it will be interesting to see how population changes (+ or -) will affect cities over the next 18 to 36 months.

unfortunately, the day labors would not be able to afford the manhattan condos. also the figure is pre-lehman bankruptcy and pre-crisis. totally useless for today...

Not entirely, as September, October, November, and December are part of 2008 and they are both post Lehamn and post-crisis. What we're really looking for is data a year out, since people may have sold and moved, broken leases, or not renewed in that period. We only have aggregate data so far for the year; monthly might be better, although also likely less informative than we might hope.

waverly -- no argument here. The population growth in that segment will aid the rental market, albeit probably not directly in Manhattan.

Demographics are huge and an undermentioned topic on these boards. Probably because it is difficult to gauge how for example the echo boomers will affect the overall market. My guess is that the most pain from these generational changes will be felt in the mcmansion market. The baby boomers are ready to leave them and there won't be enough demand among Genxers to take them.

NYC will see an major outflow of top income earners over the next few years. Taxes up, jobs and income down = productive people leaving. The remainder will be (A) those "stuck" in overpriced real estate and (B) low income earners and the unemployed. Welcome to your future, NY'ers.

BS, your scenario might not be good for high end RE but if 'low income earners' means doctors, writers and teachers at the expense of wall st bsd's it's not such a bad thing for the city

BS, your scenario might not be good for high end RE but if 'low income earners' means doctors, writers and teachers at the expense of wall st bsd's it's not such a bad thing for the city

I would argue that the phrasing would be more accurate as: "NYC MAY see an major outflow of top income earners over the next few years" or "NYC will LIKELY see an major outflow of top income earners over the next few years."

Cleaning out some of the Wall Street nonsense that flourished recently could be good for the city in the long term.

"Cleaning out some of the Wall Street nonsense that flourished recently could be good for the city in the long term."

Yes that's definitely true, but it will take a good 5-10 years to recover from the hangover caused by the Roaring 2000s.

All I know is that I'm one of the people who busted my ass for low 6-figures the past few years and paid my taxes and was generally a good boy, and my apparent reward is that my taxes will be increased to pay the salaries of all the govt workers added to the payrolls during this decade and also for the pensions and health care for cops and firefighters who retired at age 45. I have nothing against such people, but I really don't care to pay for their Viagra prescriptions and vacation homes on the Jersey shore with my hard earned money. So I can either stay and see approximately 50 percent of my salary donated to the state, city and federal govt or I can move to another area of the country with better economic prospects and much lower taxes. I'm sure a lot of people in my position are thinking something similar, if they haven't already moved away.

BS - beat it. NYC doesn't need you. It's still the greatest city in the world and for every "couldn't quite hack it" like you that throws in the towel, there are a hundred looking to make their mark. I am OK paying more taxes - I wish I could have paid them for the past 8 years so things had never gotten this bad with the nation's and state's financial situation.

"So I can either stay and see approximately 50 percent of my salary donated to the state, city and federal govt or I can move to another area of the country with better economic prospects and much lower taxes"

Yea, have fun in Texas.

LOL.

anyone know if the 53,000 figure includes illegal immigrants?

"I am OK paying more taxes - I wish I could have paid them for the past 8 years so things had never gotten this bad with the nation's and state's financial situation"

Well, you are a sucker then. Why don't you ask why the city and state govts can't live within their means??? Why are the productive taxpayers supposed to bail out all of the union and govt workers??? I didn't know socialism was still believed in - but apparently it is by you. BTW, I've been "hacking it" for the past 8 years, but enough is enough already.

"Yea, have fun in Texas. LOL."

It's states like TX (i.e., the ones that actually are fiscally responsible) that NY should emulate. Of course, ignorant people like you mock them and don't get it.

Texas is a backwards state. HORRIBLE schools. You got people down there who want to leave the union, etc.

lmao, you little poor.

I've lived in Texas and I would rather pay 50% more in taxes than move back to that shithole. New York City vs Texas, lol.

....Because we all dream of living in Texas. Nobody is going anywhere.

Truth is, the higher income earners hope taxes and home prices stay high so we can drive the undesirables out of the city into lower cost areas. People with money aren't complaining.

OTNYC and wonderboy - you should read this - it might enlighten you a little:

Lone Star Lessons
What Texas and Florida can teach big spending states
Leonard Gilroy | November 26, 2008

One of the most profound spillover effects of the current economic crisis is that it has also exposed a festering fiscal health crisis in state and local government. "Drunken sailor" spending in recent years and declining property values (and thus reduced property tax revenues) have combined to produce massive state and city budget shortfalls.

A recent study by the Center for Budget & Policy Priorities found that at least 41 states have recently faced, or are facing, budget deficits. Today 13 states are staring at budget shortfalls in excess of $1 billion in fiscal year 2009, with California ($31 billion) and New York ($6.4 billion) leading the pack. Moody's recently reported that 30 states are in recession, and 19 more are at risk.

At the local level, New York City is facing a $2.3 billion shortfall, and its transit agency, the New York Metropolitan Transit Authority, is $1 billion in the hole (both figures are larger than some state deficits).

How governments find themselves in this position is obvious: They're addicted to spending taxpayer dollars. Kudos to New York Gov. David Paterson for a refreshing bit of political honesty, telling The Wall Street Journal last week that, "What's actually more embarrassing than the fact that we have such a huge deficit now, when bonuses are down and capital gains are down, is the fact that when there was...wealth, we overspent."

This hasn't stopped the big spenders from seeking a federal bailout. In September, we saw California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger fire the first shot across the bow, hinting at possibly needing $7 billion in federal assistance to keep the state's doors open. The Governator has increased state spending by over 40 percent since he made his failed promise to blow up the boxes of state government.

Several weeks ago we saw a parade of governors and mayors on Capitol Hill asking for a bailout of state and local government. On that occasion, South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford was the voice of fiscal sanity, offering a cautionary warning that "[t]his $150 billion may in fact further infect our economy with unnecessary government influence and unintended fiscal consequences."

Most recently, the mayors of three big cities—Philadelphia, Atlanta, and Phoenix—sent a letter to Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson asking the feds to use a portion of the $700 billion bailout to assist struggling cities.

States are looking to the feds for help because the two usual go-to sources of funding for state and local governments—taxes and bonds—are going to be severely constrained in the coming years. The political will to raise state and local taxes is almost non-existent. And the tough credit market means states—especially those with big deficits—are going to have a hard time borrowing, prompting some analysts to believe we've seen the end of an era of relatively cheap money and easy borrowing for governments.

So what's a state to do to climb out of the fiscal hole they've dug themselves into? It's simple: Spend within your means and partner with the private sector more often to deliver more services.

Texas is currently the envy of the nation with an $11 billion budget surplus. How did the state do it? For starters, the Texas Constitution gives the state Comptroller of Public Accounts (a chief fiscal officer, of sorts) the responsibility to certify the state's budget and send back any spending bills that the state can't afford. It's an elected position and the current comptroller, Susan Combs, launched a "Where the Money Goes" website to boost transparency and show taxpayers where their money is going. Having a third-party enforce prudent fiscal forecasting and spending helps to avoid the situation so many states now face—governors and legislators gravitate to the rosiest of revenue projections to help justify new spending, and then when the mythical money doesn't materialize, the state faces a budget "crisis."

Texas also engages in performance-based budgeting—tying a given programs' funding to its effectiveness at meeting clear performance targets. A Sunset Advisory Commission conducts mandatory periodic reviews of all state agencies to find duplicative or unnecessary programs that must be cut. Since the Sunset Commission was created in 1977, over 47 governmental agencies have been eliminated and another 11 have been consolidated.

Similarly, Washington state and South Carolina apply a performance budgeting model in which state activities are ranked in order of priority and effectiveness. The administration then "purchases" (funds) the activities from the top of the list down until all available revenues have been used up, ditching the lowest priority activities and eliminating poor-performing, unnecessary, or wasteful ones.

Policymakers also seem to be increasingly recognizing that privatization and competitive service delivery are proven tools for doing more with less. Competitive sourcing allows the private sector to compete for jobs and contracts that are currently performed by the government. Federal employees actually won 83 percent of the job competitions from fiscal year 2003 through fiscal year 2007. But the competition still helps save a lot of money. Taxpayers saved $25,000 for every job that was put up for competition because even when the government kept the job it significantly improved efficiency and reduced costs.

Privatization is also coming back into vogue these days, partially buoyed by the successful track record of former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush. The state engaged in over 138 privatization initiatives saving taxpayers over $550 million in aggregate during Bush's term (1999-2007). When many other states were raising taxes, Bush's privatization initiatives helped Florida to shed almost $20 billion in taxes and over 3,700 positions in the state workforce.

And at the urban level, Chicago Mayor Richard Daley, a Democrat, has been on a privatization tear in recent years. Under his watch he's privatized over 40 services and activities, saving taxpayers millions. Since 2005, Daley has initiated long-term lease agreements with the private sector for the Chicago Skyway toll road, Midway Airport, four major downtown parking garages, and the city's parking meter system downtown. Chicago netted over $5 billion in the process to pay down city debt, establish a $500 million rainy day fund, and shore up public pensions.

There are ways for cities and states to dig out of this fiscal mess. Making taxpayers pay for a federal handout won't solve a problem rooted in a state government's addiction to spending. As state and local governments begin to reckon with the magnitude of their fiscal crunch, privatization and more prudent fiscal stewardship will be the key to "right-sizing" government and avoiding future binge spending when economic conditions do improve.

Leonard Gilroy is the director of government reform at The Reason Foundation.

The Post headline is misleading. The percentage of population growth, which is the more important figure, is 0.6% and not what anyone looking at population trends would call "a fast clip." What is noteworthy are the comments from the chief demographer who says "[o]ur inflows and outflows are balancing each other in ways we haven't seen in 25 years." With immigration flattening out, and fewer residents leaving than in years past, it's a positive trend because we don't need a larger population creating a strain on services that are already stretched to the max and causing existing residents to be taxed at rates that are already too high.

the overall population, however, of NY State is shrinking.

"The Post headline is misleading. The percentage of population growth, which is the more important figure, is 0.6% and not what anyone looking at population trends would call "a fast clip."

Ding dong, it's IMPOSSIBLE for a city as large as New York to lead population growth by percentage.

A smaller town with a population of 100,000 can grow by 1,000 and topple New York City when it comes to growth by percentage.

In terms of raw numbers, New York City's growth is impressive.

"OTNYC and wonderboy - you should read this - it might enlighten you a little:"

What does that have to do with me?

I live in Manhattan and they live in shithole Texas. Enough said.

"Ding dong, it's IMPOSSIBLE for a city as large as New York to lead population growth by percentage."

Oh really wonderboy??! Tell that to people who have lived in Mexico City or São Paulo over the past 25 years.

quote from article:
"New York City grew by more than 53,000 residents for the 12-month period ending July 2008, the biggest numerical increase of any city in the country, a US Census estimate shows."

data almost a yr old...meaningless for current read of demographic trends in NYC

"Oh really wonderboy??! Tell that to people who have lived in Mexico City or São Paulo over the past 25 years."

I'm talking civilized countries, not third-world cesspools.

"data almost a yr old...meaningless for current read of demographic trends in NYC "

Why would the demographics dramatically change? I supposed you've missed the statistics revealing more people staying put during a economic downturn? Do you think everything erased and New York City's population dropped during the last few months?

LOL, idiot.

wonnderboys exactly correct...NY metro has approx 8m people...55k growth over a yr ago is nothing

BS, November 2008 is the best you can do?

Many of us are angered by being clobbered by the excesses of the boom years and being stuck with the bill. I've never made anything even close to $100k in my life, and yet I get to bail out bankers too. My question is, what exactly is going to change by moving to Texas? You seem to be holding the city responsible for national decisions, which is absurd.

President: Texas has wonderful private schools, and a non-existent state income tax. Why do you think Bonderman and the Bass family have stayed? Moreover, unlike NY, buying a piece of property in the last 5-10 years in North Texas could have potentially earned you a hefty royalty if you were sitting on the Barnett Shale. Finally, its a state that welcomes its immigrant population with plentiful jobs in the homecare and lawncare industries to staff and clip all the mcmansions.

i was defending you boy wonder...NYC's pop growth on % basis isnt that big

NEW YORK CITY not New York Metro.

And 55k growth over a year is a lot.

sirwinston, I think you mean wonderboy is completely wrong as he seems to believe that an additional 55K out of 8.3MM is some type of population explosion.

o sorry, i wasnt defending you...i was defending HDLC who clearly has brains...didnt mean to make that mistake with you

manhattan has 2.5-3m...55k is NOTHING

Who the hell said 55K growth in a year is an explosion? It's a lot of people but I never said it was an explosion.

You've already failed the argument to just disappear please.

a 55k addition is entirely meaningless in terms of the real estate market...its an infinitesimal amount of incremental demand

who the hell said anything about the real estate market????????????

55k is 1.8% of 3M -- not exactly stellar growth -- and I think its not that far of a stretch to consider that at least some have fled. NYC, although arguably one of the greatest cities on earth (to visit) is an absolute slog to live in if you're below certain economic thresholds. The quality of life to be found in most other places (in terms of what you can get for your money space wise) is exponentially greater. They're just "not new york" -- which keeps many schlubs stuck on the hednonic treadmill, and justifying to themselves that $1200 to $1500 per square ft. must be worth it because "it's New York." Stupidity.

last I checked this was a blog about the real estate market...or should we call this, populationeasy

Al_Swearingen

Have fun in Texas. It's not my fault you can't afford New York.

wb -- like the Bass family, I can afford both.

LOL, only poor people complain about taxes and $1,500 per square foot.

New York, NY is for good people, low COL cities (Phoenix, Houston) are for the aspirational losers.

Ciao.

wb - what's an "aspriational loser"? Someone who aspires, but fails, to lose? Wouldn't that make me a winner? Perhaps you should aspire to learn how to write.

BS
It's embarrassing that even with their huge burden of illegal immigrants Texas has an $11B surplus and despite the boom in real estate tax income and personal income tax revenue we have a $6B deficit.

We can make fun of them all we want, call them hick "until the cows come home" but these numbers are just embarrassing.

Texas has a surplus because of the oil revenues. DUH. The same is true for Alaska and North Dakota. They don't call it black gold for nothing.

LOL, "learn how to write"? What?

You mean learn how to write with sensitivity? How do I put this kindly..... nevermind, I can't.

Only a destitute pauper would come on to streeteasy and complain about taxes and ppsf. It's such a pity that you can't afford to live in New York but I really don't want to hear about it. Aspirational loser = poor wannabee who dreams of living my lifestyle but is stuck in a cheap cookie cutter home in southern bumblefuck, USA.

Understand?

"LOL, only poor people complain about taxes and $1,500 per square foot"

Poor people don't pay taxes, genius. If you paid any significant taxes (which it is obvious you don't), you would be complaining also.

"My question is, what exactly is going to change by moving to Texas? You seem to be holding the city responsible for national decisions, which is absurd."

I never said I was moving to TX - I've never even been there. All I'm saying is that NY should follow their example of being fiscally responsible - if they had done so over the past 10 years, we wouldn't be in this huge mess now. And I am holding NEW YORK CITY and NEW YORK STATE govts responsible for their own idiotic decisions - i.e., spending way beyond their means, hiring unnecessary workers, giving in to union demands, etc. - I refuse to bail them out. As for national decisions, the past 10 years have been atrocious as well, however I don't have any choice but to pay federal taxes, as I am not going to leave the country or quit working.

"Texas has a surplus because of the oil revenues. DUH. The same is true for Alaska and North Dakota. They don't call it black gold for nothing."

NYS and NYC had huge revenues from 2000 through 2007 b/c of Wall St, BUT THEY BLEW IT BY MASSIVE OVERSPENDING. It's called FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY, which the politicians in NYS and NYC are utterly clueless about.

Be grateful you live in New York and shut it. Every good city comes with high taxes. Fabulousness comes with a price!!!

not all good cities have high taxes. Seattle does not have a city or state income tax.

wb - YOU can pay for EVERYONE and EVERYTHING - go ahead and be my guest. There's a name for that - a SUCKER. People with any brains protect themselves from getting raped by irresponsible politicians.

Seattle is a stupid place

And I'm talking 1st caliber cities, not Seattle, Denver, Atlanta, Portland junk places.

wonderboy - are you a 16-year-old kid or something? You seem very immature.

People with any brains protect themselves from getting raped by irresponsible politicians.

What exactly can one do to protect themselves from being raped? I would rather just take it like a good boy.

The taxes aren't that bad to me anyway.

"Texas is a backwards state. HORRIBLE schools."

And the public schools here are so fabulous ...

No.

the schools in the suburbs are considered to e some of the best. And so is Stuvyestant.

"And the public schools here are so fabulous ..."

I took a detour on my way home from work last night and walked through some of the public housing projects on the LES - I thought I was in a 3rd world country. So, please, let's not keep pretending that we live in a utopia compared with the rest of the country. NYC is not any better than any other large city.

New York STATE is a craphole.

New York City (/Westchester/LI) should break away from the worthless grubbing state and take and retain the name New York and the other half should find a new name and deal with their drying crapola cities like Albany and Buffalo.

what was the puprose of the "detour" into the projects? Buying drugs?

The_President - Texas' government gets only 3% of their revenue from oil.

"what was the puprose of the "detour" into the projects? Buying drugs?"

I was running along the East River but tired out, and I thought it would be quicker to get back home by cutting through the LES than by continuing up East River Park. So, no, I buy my drugs elsewhere.

I know. I was just joking...

"I took a detour on my way home from work last night and walked through some of the public housing projects on the LES - I thought I was in a 3rd world country. So, please, let's not keep pretending that we live in a utopia compared with the rest of the country. NYC is not any better than any other large city."

I've taken Detours in Houston and honestly thought I was in the middle of Tijuana. Who said New York didn't have bad parts? Every city does you fool!

God help me if I ever had to live is this shithole...

Tenants at Baruch Houses smell more than a rat

By Aman Singh

The 30,000 residents of Baruch Houses have been living with a recognizable stink for the past one-year, coming from sewage-filled basements in the housing complexes.

A labor activist group, Committee for Progress, protested in front of 100 Columbia St. Sunday to demand action from the New York City Housing Authority for what, according to George Contoveros, the President of the group, “is becoming an environmental hazard”.

Residents of Baruch Houses, the 2,400- apartment complex on the Lower East Side, have been living with this foul stench for more than a year now.

According to Keishe Winfield, who lives on the ground floor of 521 FDR Drive, the smell has become a part of their daily environment. “It was in the back of the complex initially, then it moved to the front side. That’s when it became unbearable,” said Winfield.

“People cannot move freely, the lobby stinks and the residents are worried that the Authorities might retaliate if they protest,” said Contoveros. “I became more intensely involved when I saw one of the tenants having mosquito bite-marks on her hands. The sewage creates these bugs which can be so hazardous,” he added.

Winfield agreed saying, “There is frequent air bubbling in the toilet making the entire apartment reek of sewage. I didn’t notice it initially because it wasn’t distinct enough to make me think, there was a genuine problem going on here.”

A day after the protest, the Housing Authority ordered an investigation into the issue denying any former knowledge of the problem. “There are no sewage backups at Baruch houses. The inspections were made of all crawl spaces and no backups were found. Some minor leaks, unrelated sewage, were discovered and they were repaired,” Howard Marder, NYCHA spokesperson, said in a prepared statement.

Another resident of 521, Wilton King, who lives on the fourth floor, denounced the NYCHA, saying, “The Housing Authority usually pretends they’re working on the problem but never solve it completely.”

“How is it possible that they work on these premises every single day of the year and don’t notice the smell and the obvious source of the smell?” questioned Winfield.

Many residents were pleased to hear their neighbors organized a protest.

“I wasn’t even aware of the protest, but am so thankful that it happened. I’m sick of it but didn’t do anything about it because I kept assuming the authorities knew about it,” said King.

BSexposer

What does this have to do with me? I have money. New York is utopia for fabulous people like me. Get it?

> In the 12-month period ending in July 2008

Wow, SteveF really knows how to pull out an irrelevant stat!

nyc10022, do you not know how the census works? The statistics were released today by the census, jackass.

Malthus - Good point. I agree that it will be interesting to see how the population/demographics plays out going forward for all cities, but of course mostly for NYC since we live here.

wonderboy, are you a trust fund baby? betcha never made a dime

What gives you that impression?

I can't find the changing demographics for the entire city I found one for Brooklyn:

Check out the big brain on Brooklyn.

The borough’s high school and college graduation rates made a big leap since 2000 — and so did its wealth and number of people employed, according to new U.S. Census Bureau numbers released last week.

Those were three trends revealed in figures, compiled from 2005 through 2007, that proved what many had already known: Brooklyn was experiencing a renaissance.

“It’s not a surprise because it’s been visible on the streets,” said Brooklyn College sociology professor Jerry Krase. “You saw bodegas replaced by organic stores and coffee shops by juice bars, and you could tell. Those were educated, high-earning people moving in.”

The number of 25-year-olds holding at least a high school diploma soared 17%, to 1.2 million, while those with at least a bachelor’s degree rose by 30%, to 438,568 people, according to the statistics.

Brooklyn College professor David Bloomfield suggested rapid gentrification played a role. “It may reflect higher-educated adults coming in to the borough from elsewhere,” said Bloomfield. “It can be higher-educated adults from the Caribbean, from Asia and elsewhere. The result is more highly educated citizens.”

In that same period, Brooklyn public high schools’ four-year graduation rate — including GEDs — jumped dramatically to 59.8% in 2007, up from 46.6% in 2000, city Education Department data show.

In the meantime, the borough's ethnic balance has also shifted.

Demographic data showed Asians accounted for the borough's biggest jump, with a 21% increase, from 185,818 to 224,384 from 2000 to 2007. Meanwhile, Brooklyn's white population grew by 6%, from 1.02 million to 1.08 million.

The number of black Brooklynites dropped slightly, by 1% - from 898,350 to 889,330. Hispanic residents increased by 1%, from 487,878 to 494,525.

Brooklynites also reported a median household income of $40,942, a 27% increase from 2000, when it was just $32,135. Families in Cobble Hill, Park Slope and Bedford-Stuyvesant all saw fortunes rise dramatically.

At the same time, the percentage of unemployed Brooklynites decreased from 10.7% in 2000 to 7.8%, the numbers revealed.

But some experts could not ignore that the three-year Census snapshot was taken at the plateau of a long and prosperous economic surge that is now over.

"The numbers are going to be significantly higher over the past year or so," said Brooklyn Economic Development Corp. President Joan Bartolomeo about the borough's unemployment rate. "It would not surprise me at all to see the numbers jump back into ... the double digits in the next six months."

The numbers also reflected several other fascinating slices of life in Brooklyn.

# The number of African immigrants from sub-Saharan countries like Ghana and Sudan more than doubled, from 36,832 in 2001 to 75,850 in 2007 - making them the largest number of new immigrants.

# Known for its double-wide strollers and kid-friendly restaurants, Park Slope had a baby boom, with the number of children under the age of 5 growing by 35% since 2000.

# More borough residents coughed up a large part of their paycheck for rent, with the proportion of renters spending at least 30% of their income rising from 43% to 50%.

http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/brooklyn/2008/12/16/2008-12-16_youth_movement_fires_brooklyn_boro_gentr.html

"nyc10022, do you not know how the census works? The statistics were released today by the census, jackass."

Moron, they could release them 6 years from now, that won't make them any less outdated.

Why the need to lash out? Did you lose your life savings?

you claim to be wealthy but love paying taxes and you used 'fabulous' (one of which referred to self) in two separate posts on this page
that makes you a... what exactly?

that makes you a... what exactly?

Makes me.....spoiled?

i'll take it as a yes

"Moron, they could release them 6 years from now, that won't make them any less outdated."

Are you dumb or what? Why would the population be drastically different than that reported a few months ago? Unless we've just witnessed an Armegeddon, a major attack or a massive flu outbreak would it not be safe to assume that the figures are relatively unchanged?

"i'll take it as a yes"

Why does it matter?

"Are you dumb or what? Why would the population be drastically different than that reported a few months ago? Unless we've just witnessed an Armegeddon, a major attack or a massive flu outbreak would it not be safe to assume that the figures are relatively unchanged?"

You're trying to assume that there are no factors that might have changed things in NYC after, uh, July, and you're asking me if *I'm* dumb.

Uh, yeah.

Seriously, dude, stay off the crack.

because you went after other people for not wanting to pay more taxes. which means a)you are not paying any yourself or b)you are paying them on wealth someone else created

You're trying to assume that there are no factors that might have changed things in NYC after, uh, July,

Yes. The population figures next year will be the same.

"because you went after other people for not wanting to pay more taxes. which means a)you are not paying any yourself or b)you are paying them on wealth someone else created"

You don't want to pay taxes? How terrible of you.

"You don't want to pay taxes? How terrible of you."

I don't object to paying my FAIR SHARE of taxes - what I object to is paying MORE THAN MY FAIR SHARE of taxes to pay for OTHER PEOPLE'S CUSHY LIVES and to BAIL OTHER PEOPLE OUT OF THEIR BAD DECISIONS. If wonderboy ever worked his ass off at a real job, he would understand this perspective.

Who said life was fair?

Never said it was - but that's no reason just to cave in and take it. If you don't fight for your rights, don't expect anyone else to do it for you. I refuse to sit there and take it. Good luck getting my $$$$, deadbeats - ain't going to happen...

How much do you make?

I'm sick of paying taxes. I'm thinking of ways to reduce my tax bill and the only thing I can come up with is buying Turbo Tax.

Are the taxes higher in New Jersey?

wb - I make about 2 times the amount that get deposited in my bank account - and it pisses me off.

And how much is that?

"Good luck getting my $$$$, deadbeats - ain't going to happen..."

Do you have swiss accounts?

wow, aren't you just so bubbly and cute wonderboy

"You're trying to assume that there are no factors that might have changed things in NYC after, uh, July,

Yes. The population figures next year will be the same. "

Yes, the guy on the internet said so.

So, if all we needed was that, why were you so defensive about the outdated article? Why even look at stats if wondergenius just has to tell us?

Nothing has changed you idiot.

Get over it!!