Poll: Increased Tax Changes Coming to NYC?

1. NYC City: No
2. NY State: Yes
3. Federal: Yes
4. NYC Property Tax: Yes
5. Pied-a-terre: Yes
6. Wealth tax: No
7. Corporate landord tax: No
8. Other tax not listed: N/A

Not a tax expert. But wanted to start the thread! I guess I should have put in brackets for Federal, whether any increase in Federal comes with a SALT reversal.

State taxes seem unlikely to increase if you’re to believe Cuomo, though the new dem supermajority could be an issue. The proposed pied e terre tax really should only drag on high lux properties as it’s for $5mm and up property values. Federal taxes are likely to increase for >$400k earners, however it may come with a SALT repeal. Honestly, even if Democrats win both GA runoff senate seats, as long as Manchin is in the senate you’re not gonna see a massive tax hike.

1, 2, 5, 6, 7. All no.
3. Federal - yes (for higher income tax brackets).
4. Best way to raise taxes since properties don't have legs. - probably yes.
8. Tax on mortgages for Coops?

No to #3 if dems cannot take two seats in Ga runoff. if Dems fail, fed taxes will stay the same. Next chance for Dems to take senate is 2022, assuming of course they can hold onto the house .

Cant see #5 taking place with Cuomo and most Dems opposing. Are there enough progressives to push this through. I am guessing no.

Goldman looking for space in Fl for its NYC based Asset Management division . Dems should take note that the golden goose (NYC)can easily drown with a deluge of new taxes. So overall, maybe a yes to #3. But you also have to remember with Cuomo dreaming about a prez run in 2024, he's not looking for NYS to add to its reputation as a high tax state.

Seems like a more benign outlook than I expected. Property taxes rise to fill the gap, but otherwise no big push for taxes over the next 1-2 years.

1. NYC City: Yes
2. NY State: Maybe
3. Federal: No unless 2 seats taken in GA runoff;unlikely
4. NYC Property Tax: Yes bigly
5. Pied-a-terre: Yes
6. Wealth tax: No
7. Corporate landord tax: No
8. Other tax not listed: Maybe

For all those saying tax increases will be benign. How does 2+2=5? It’s just math. NYC faces a big budget shortfall. It has no borrowing authority. It then either needs to cut services or raise taxes. How does it fill said gap.

As I used to hear daily when I lived in London, “mind the gap!”

Possible gap closers...

-Stimulus bill is still a mystery, but their is a possible 100-150 billion in state/city aid coming
-NYC cannot borrow unless Cumo ok's it. I dont think its a definite yet that Cuomo will not ok the city borrowing to close part of the gap
-Layoffs for NYC seem likely. With the private sector losing a large percentage of jobs, you would think public sector employment staying the same would be ludicrous (but yeah, with progressives, ludicrous is standard operating procedure)
-Would be a shocker if Dems pull off 2 in Ga. In that case 3-4 trillion in a second stim bill is on the table. Money will flood city and state coffers and at least on the state city level, no tax increases, but fed #3 becomes a reality.

“If Washington gives us some of it, then we’re going to have to redo a budget, we’re going to have to raise taxes—I believe we’re going to have to raise taxes, at the end of the day, in any event,” Mr. Cuomo said. “The question is, how much in tax?” WSJ 12/9

There goes #2

NY is already #1. Looks like we want to increase our lead..
https://wallethub.com/edu/states-with-highest-lowest-tax-burden/20494

All of the above.

https://nypost.com/2020/12/09/ny-dems-eye-taxes-on-rich-sports-betting-amid-covid-fiscal-crisis/

BTW, I think that a pied-a-terre tax is an excellent idea. Anyone who can afford a home in NYC and not be renting it out, while not paying NY income tax, should pay some other way. In other places, this is implemented by having a high rate of property tax with a generous credit if you also declare the residence to be your primary home on your income taxes. But NYS property taxes are so screwed up that this wouldn't work. However it's implemented, I hope it results in some people selling their barely-used properties and improving affordability for people who actually live in NY and pay the state's outrageous income taxes.

George, There is already a rebate for primary residence in NYC condo/coop. The issue is out of control spending. You know the subway construction cost.

I would personally support a pied-a-terre tax (but I can’t vote in NY), even though it would adversely affect me, potentially even prompting me to sell the NY apartment, most likely at a loss that would affect other spending. I support measures that make the city more affordable for those who live and work there full-time. Can somebody with knowledge of the history of efforts to impose such a tax educate me on why such efforts have not succeeded?

Never mind - I just gooogled “the case against the pied a terre tax in NYC.” It will be interesting to see what happens; again, were I a voter in NY, I’d support it, but as with so many issues, my opinion is beside the point/just doesn’t matter.

What would impact on rents be? Would a Pied a Terre tax would raise rents, because any non-big box rental unit would be a Pied a Terre? Or would it drive down asset values, no impact on rents?

I toured 6 rental units over the last week. 100% of them are owned by foreign investors, and some of them don't care of their units or brokers at all, and it seems healthy to eliminate them. I currently rent from a foreign investor who claims homestead exemption of some sort (yet owns 5 units in our building on the same Miami corporation, but our tax happy politicians don't care about actually implementing tax policy.. just hitting W-2 earners cuz why not everyone votes by their favorite childhood primary color anyway).

Investment properties/rentals were not included in those proposed to be taxed under the versions that I read about; only coops and condos that are used as second homes.

Interestingly enough, when I did the math, it did not look like our unit would actually end up being taxed because the tax kicks in at assessed value of the coop apartment over $300,000, and the assessed value of our building is so low that on a per share basis, I do not believe our apartment actually comes in at a value of over $300,000.

I was thinking "that cannot be right," but as I think about how much I've read about NYC property taxes not making any sense, maybe it is. I'd love for anyone with knowledge to jump in.

I just did more math and I believe that is right. Moreoever, it appears that only one of the apartments in our coop that is used as a pied-a-terre would actually get hit with the tax, and the amount of the tax would be around $10,000. It looks like condos would be hit harder to the extent I assume their assessed values are more in line with their actual market value?

@multicityresident sorry if this is a very basic question, but why would condo assessed values be more in line with market values? I thought city uses the same formula to calc assessed values on units in all apartment buildings (both coops and condos)?

@Krolik - I don’t pretend to have a clue. All I know is that condos generally carry higher assessed values than coops do. Maybe it is as simple as they command higher rent because they tend to be newer with more amenities and are more easily rented than coops.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/new-york-needs-to-raise-taxes-gov-andrew-cuomo-says-11607545030

Thank you. Did not realize a pied-a-terre tax would be so limited, I assumed it would impact those with investment property in NYC as well. Enforcement of this tax seems hard to do - how do you really know who rents out or not? NYC doesn't even do a great job of keeping up with who lives in a unit or not.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-12-11/moelis-gives-his-bankers-blessing-to-work-wherever-they-want

Not to make this a vent on the taxes, but I am doing my annual budgeting and wishing my employer would move out of New York too. I am simply not saving enough here. Moving to FL/TX etc. would cut my housing cost by 50%, my taxes by 20%, and school cost by 50-100%, all which would go into savings. My savings rate would go up 75%+ overnight! And this does not include lower cost of daycare, food, services etc.

Find a different employer in those states. It will likely come with a pay cut and growth opportunities. You can always do public school in NYC.

And if you are focused on national rankings of private schools (I am sure you know Niche), FL and TX do not have than many choices.

Happily woudl have done public school pre-COVID.

It will be back to normal in Sept 2021. For now, private schools are clearly doing much better job in education vs public schools. My preschooler is in-person daily.

I have made up my mind. If I can get an equivalent job (the if) in a 0% sales tax state I am making that trade. Having parents who can double their savings rate is more important than a NYC 'cultural' expeirence or private school experience. There is that "if"

P.S. sounds like a State tax hike coming and will try to make it retroactive to 2020 per Bloomberg.

What pay cut will you likely take elsewhere? 30%? And how do you factor potentially lower career growth in elsewhere as there are not enough competitors?

I sent my kids to private. I went to public growing up. If I had to do it all over, I would send my kids to
a decent public. Does not even have to be a great public. Much of it depends on the kid. Private imho is way over rated. Its not like you even get smarter kids around you, just parents who pay up.

Retro to 2020 ? yeesh. My friend who is single escaped to another state. NYC has appeal but he had his business out of state anyway. High earner, no plans to come back.

This stuff about taking a pay cut elsewhere and lower career growth is B.S. Maybe it's true for a software engineer at Facebook or a Customer Success person at AirBNB. But once you get to the point where you're concerned about differences in taxation, you have a global market value that's basically the same if you're in London, Tokyo, NYC, or Wahoo Iowa. I've done the benchmarking. You can save 15-25% of compensation costs by moving your masses of office workers from London to Dublin and another 5-15% for a move from Dublin to Galway, but executives cost the same everywhere. If anything, they cost more in remote locations.

I have a long list of business prospects who are eager to visit my place in Nowhere. A permanent move there might even advance my career by helping me build better relationships outside conference rooms of NYC. We haven't moved in part because schools there are so jammed.

As for taxes, the savings are bigger than Mouse calculated. The property tax mill rate on a condo, as a percentage of market value, in NYC, is about 100. In other words, 1% of the market value is tax every year. In Nowhere, the mill rate is around 30. So Mouse could move from a $4M condo here where you pay $40,000 in property tax (embedded in the rent) to a much nicer place that costs $1.5M in Wherever and has property taxes of under $5K. Additionally, the mortgage savings on $2.5M are another $75K/year. That's $110K in savings on housing. The same amount of money to your bottom line would require boosting your income by $200K in NYC. The numbers are enormous, which is why I've been saying since the start of Covid that the cost of living differential has to narrow (but not completely close).

https://www.wsj.com/articles/new-york-state-lawmakers-weigh-tax-increase-on-wealthy-11608124891?st=liaen59vffokb78&reflink=article_copyURL_share

George, You have more hope for your property appreciation that facts with you. Point out large enough contiguous geographical areas say 500k population in Nowwhere and their top .01% income (residents only).

Top 1%. Globally, top executive pay varies great by country. So much for global market for talent with the same pay everywhere.

Look at this. You think many American CEO will get hired in Sweden at American salary. They wouldn't.

https://www.bbc.com/worklife/article/20190108-how-long-it-takes-a-ceo-to-earn-more-than-you-do-in-a-year

I do not think I would get paid less for an equivalent job in any other state. However, finding these jobs in NYC or out-of-state are hard. There would be less competitors to jump to, and in my arena I have seen other regions stunt growth (e.g., in past there is so much talent that wants to work in CA, that it was hard to get those jobs... and the employers there basically have a no poach policy of hiring from their competing firms in the area... difficult to prove but the practical reality).

If you do not find that job in other state, it means you are paid ZERO.

That is the difference I am talking about. You can believe what you want.

Top law firm associate wants to job in Memphis. How much pay cut? If you only want equivalent job at National top law firm, 100% as there is none. For a top law firm in Memphis, 30-50% pay cut.

You can substitute Memphis for Denver, Park City, Jacksonville.

I'm not talking about associates, who are often paid exactly the same wherever they are. I'm talking about equity partners making enough to get whacked by real taxes. Equity partners in law, consulting, audit, systems integration, asset management, etc., and their equivalents in big corporations. While some firms have black box partnership comp, the partners are often either explicitly or tacitly entitled to a certain percentage of the profit of the firm and/or their own revenues regardless of where they live. I see the same in big companies. Partners and Board Comp Committees don't sit around saying, "Well, George moved to Maine so he gets only 80% of his share compared to NY partners or NY-based C-suite executives."

Completely wrong
"I'm not talking about associates, who are often paid exactly the same wherever they are". Park City does not have associate jobs in Big Law.

Law firm partner wouldn't have much business if they were not be where their clients are and firm's main offices are. So their profit will go down.

Consultants travel all the time. So they were always able to work from whereever.

Most MD type asset managers need to be at the center of information flow. I know a few Partners at top investment banks who has home elsewhere but have to come to office 5 days a week in NY. They are not stupid. If they didn't come in office when everyone else was, their junior will take their job in a couple of years.

Board Comp committee with say to someone in top management based elsewhere (no company presence) away from headquarters, "Do you think we really need him/her."?

What is the pay cut?

George, You used the narrative you are giving to justify your purchase in nowhere. It may work for you well and I certainly wish you the best. But most high paying $200k plus jobs (doctors and consultants are big exclusion) I know do not have the transferability right now to elsewhere at even 20% discount to major cities. 5 years from now, who knows as major corporations may more out from increasing left leaning/ high tax states like California.

more=move

My little post generated 8 responses.

Law - I have done a lot of work without ever seeing a lawyer face to face. I can't remember the last time I saw a lawyer in person. I have hired great lawyers whom I don't even know what they look like. This job is highly mobile

Consulting - always on the road anyway, doesn't matter where their home airport is

Audit - obviously depends on the season, but there's no reason they have to be in one place all the time

Banking - again constantly on the road. A banker who is in the office 5 days a week is not in the info flow except the office politics. One of the better senior bankers that I know goes to Europe once a week in normal times. With better planes, even second tier cities have direct service. American flies Chicago to Cracow of all places. Someone worried about his #2 taking over needs to work on his insecurities with a therapist and go see his clients.

Asset management - already highly mobile. This is one of the biggest industries in nice Nowheres from Monaco to Honolulu.

Entrepreneurs - increasingly going where they want. Silicon Valley is broken and Boards are pressuring entrepreneurs to get out and go to places like Austin

Corporate executives - again the Comp Committee doesn't care where someone is. I know a company where any direct report to the CEO makes $2m regardless. I know public companies that say they have no HQ bc everyone is remote. This is before covid. A good executive can live anywhere.

Bottom line: The world is changing rapidly. It's not the 1950s where business leaders had to live within 10 min of HQ.

George, We will see as a test case if you are still here in June 2021 after the end of current school session as you may be a prime candidate to move to elsewhere - on the road several days a week, already own a nice house elsewhere, like being in elsewhere etc.

I agree that many get paid less outside of NYC. Indeed it is one reason why COLA is less. But there are industries or equity owners where you do not get paid less.

Mouse, Name a few industries (medical excluded) with $200k earning jobs.

Actual examples please.

I will learn something.

The exodus will be determined by employers just as much as it will be by individual workers. If, like Moelis, firms decide that it’s okay for their employees to work remotely, then they’re making a clear statement that office facetime doesn’t matter. In addition, those firms will probably save a considerable amount on rent. Plus it will open up their hiring to much larger candidate pools. Like I said, time will tell what firms decide to do, but with technology enabling service industries to do just about everything remotely, smart money gotta be going in the direction of remote working.

@300_mercer
I was specifically thinking about finance. I know people in finance generally, who have moved to FL or PR for taxes or because their firm has moved/will let them work there. Private equity, hedge funds and investment banking. I think a few of these fields are pay-for-performance and performance is not geographically bound. I knew a few early adopters who made this move years ago, and now it seems the institutions are following suit. I think the move has begun and Miami can become a financial hub like LA overtime for these fields. It is a big deal to hear GS, JPM, Moelis etc. talking like this - it provides the cover for the second movers to also contemplate this. I am not saying the finance industry is wholesale moving out of NYC, but just like LA is inundated with NYC resumes I think Miami will be same.

LA is cheap to live?

Miami is not much cheaper for a good condo and private school (not many good ones there). Of course, no state tax.

Setting aside the very high earners, I think we are underestimating the impact of the COL. One of the reasons why "$200k" jobs exist in major cities is partly because of the very high COL at a place like NYC. You don't need a $200k job in other cities to have a $200k NYC lifestyle. There are numerous calculators that show equivalent income of NYC vs other cities, and they are quite telling. For example, an income of $200k in NYC is equivalent to $100k in Houston, $110k in Atlanta, and $130k in Miami. There's a reason why the NY and CA have been steadily losing population to the Sunbelt, and it's not just because of the weather.

>> I'm talking about equity partners making enough to get whacked by real taxes

If you are making enough to be whacked by real taxes, you don’t give a shit about taxes. You just live where you wanna live.

I completely agree. If you make $200k in NY, for a substantially similar skill-set/job you will make COLA adjusted income in most cases. Employers are not stupid. While exceptions clearly exist for individuals and some professions such as Doctors, on an average there is a short term and an even bigger long term pay cut in cheaper locations. Then add in the factor of working spouse who may not have even the same professional choices in a difference location even at a lesser salary (derivatives trader in Palm Beach? Not yet.

Amazingly, the lists of remote jobs above omitted the most common of them all - software engineers. Definitely can and is often done from remote locations, though every once in a while a top tech firm will suddenly prohibit remote working and make people come to office to improve productivity.

Tech firms can hire people in India and have done that for years at 30-40% of salary they pay in the US. There is a reason they employ software engineers in the US and pay more. It has as much to do with skill-set as with managerial control, in person learning, culture, and team building.

I heard an identical "everyone can go remote now!" refrain over & over during the first tech boom (late 90s - early 00s). I can't think of any genuinely new wrinkles in today's environment, apart from more people actually giving it a whirl instead of just reading about it in trade magazines.

What I *haven't* heard lately is how productivity growth in top cities is pulling away from the pack, how young people are fleeing rural areas, how professional couples meet each other and/or solve the 2-body problem, the micromobility revolution, etc etc.

Thing is, both narratives are totally true. The balance between which type of story gets printed swings back & forth, but none of those trends are going anywhere. Come 2022, tons of people will work from wherever while tons of others move to NYC. If some of the $$ at the tip-top shifts from Park Ave to Ocean Drive, fine, that means lower COL for everyone else who stays. (and I get to laugh when their condo lobby becomes an aquarium in 40 years)

While I don’t fully disagree with George, because there is a limited population of equity-level management (C-suite) whose location doesn’t drive their salary, but he glosses over a much larger population of people who are tied to an organization in a specific location (e.g., traders, in-house professionals (tax, audit, compliance, etc.), some asset managers, some corp exec roles).

Here are some facts that relate to that part of the population:

I manage a global team of professional staff (non-income producing area) in the finance worlds that George mentioned, and have significant input into their comp. Across the title range of Associate to Managing Director, London staff are paid an average of 10-25% less than NY staff. Asia staff about 20-30% less. Powai, even less. And this is pretty consistently true across all positions in our entire global firm (20,000+ employees) I would suggest that people take a look at one of the professionally produced surveys which compare salaries across the US (McLagen is one). You will find significant pay disparity in comparable tasks/titles by location.

Over the last 10 years I’ve looked at alternatives to my NYC job both elsewhere in NY State and nationally. My general field is still somewhat niche, and there are surprisingly few of my peers elsewhere in NYState (fewer than 50). Their comp is around 2/3 to 3/4 of mine in the general field. Once you’re outside of NYC there really aren’t any NY companies who are looking for my specific sub-specialty. In the rest of the country, there are a dozen urban market centers for my general field (which tends to be located in the corporate head office, which are almost always in urban centers).

That said, our company is moving toward a WFH environment, both as part of resilience planning, and part for cost savings (driven by office rent in those market centers). The experiment of the last 9 months has helped validate that a more finely grained distribution of workforce is viable. (we were globally distributed before, just to specific market center clusters).

“I heard an identical "everyone can go remote now!" refrain over & over during the first tech boom (late 90s - early 00s)”

Because it wasn’t really possible in the 90s and early 00s. Now not only is it dead simple technologically, but we also have the perfect test case that it works.

What wasn't possible? I don't think moving from desktops to phones, or from grainy webcams to somewhat-less-grainy webcams, is what pushed stodgy corporations over the edge to acceptance. Sheer lack of alternative was a kick in the pants to make the inevitable happen a bit faster, is all.

The tech now is just dramatically better for the average user.
Even compared to a week of WFH post Sandy when the trains were screwed up.

While I have personally done videoconferencing since the 90s, I was always on the more cutting edge of hardware/software/broadband.

Broadband has gotten "fast enough" everywhere within the last 5-10 years... hell my 4G iPhone data tethering was good enough backup when I had a 2 day Fios outage. That's because your 4G iPhone wireless data is probably as fast or faster than your home broadband was 10 years ago.

Hardware wise, even the less nerdy have pretty decent enough laptops at home now.. which wasn't always the case.

Software wise.. Zoom is just dead simple, and stable.. this is a last 12-18mo development. The lowest common denominator is what will screw up every meeting, and zoom is so braindead everyone and anyone in your organization will be able to use it flawlessly. Meanwhile I was on a tech conference with a big tech consulting company who still insisted on using WebEx.. and multiple snafus ensued.
Slack/Outlook are now sufficiently polished with excellent mobile & web apps.

Corporate infrastructure wise - a lot of us were working off physical workstations under our desk as recently as 5 years ago. Now most of us are on VMs of some form so your "PC" is living in a datacenter somewhere. The box under your desk was just a means of remoting in to the VM, and so you have an equal experience when WFH. That is - you can work remotely, to your same desktop as in the office with multiple monitors, etc.

My company started doing informal surveys on satellite offices / wfh, so I think we'll see a reduction or slowed growth of our Manhattan footprint. Like previous firms I've been at, when you are growing it is very hard to keep Manhattan office leasing/build out on pace with hiring. Usually by the time a build out finishes, the floor is 95% spoken for and the process starts again. I've worked at firms that froze hiring for a few quarters because we didn't build out floor space fast enough.

+1 on inonada's: "If you are making enough to be whacked by real taxes, you don’t give a shit about taxes. You just live where you wanna live."

With respect to WFH, those in tech have been able to work from home since the late 90's (for me it started in 1998 - tech department of the company I worked for outfitted us with RAS or VPN or something like that - I don't recall what it was, but they gave us tutorials and it was easy).

However, BigLaw litigation (and particularly large scale commercial litigation) took awhile longer to get up to speed in ability to work remotely, but it is there now. I can't speak to other industries,but it is night and day different from what it was 15 years ago.

With that said, I never discount the team-building aspect of in person interaction. Just one opinion: Corporate politics are real and best played in person. Add to that point that I don't know many rain makers who don't put in serious face time with their teams, and it has historically been easier to build quality teams in metropolitan areas that offer good career opportunities for both partners in any dual-income household (increasingly the majority, and even though at higher levels one partner may drop out, at the post-grad entry level, the most sought-after recruits are often paired with similarly ambitious partners who are not going to forego their own career opportunities to follow their partner to Nowhere, USA).

Bottom line: As I've said before, I don't think NYC is going anywhere in terms of its preeminence as the center of excellence for many professions. Time will tell, but one final note for George: The fact that you refer to your childrens' bedrooms as cages (no judgment; I think it is hilarious) suggests to me that you are destined to remain in NYC.

-1 on inonada's: "If you are making enough to be whacked by real taxes, you don’t give a shit about taxes. You just live where you wanna live." I am getting whacked by real taxes and it is really harming my savings rate. What $ do you think is the number to be considered "whacked" on an absolute basis? $1MM pre-tax? $2MM pre-tax? more?

I was making an asshole response to an asshole statement.

If you make $50K, you pay (say) $9K in taxes. Is that “real” money? Maybe not to you rich assholes, but if you’re trying to live on $41K then the $9K can feel like an awfully large whack.

If you make $500K, you pay (say) $184K. Is that “real” money? $184K in taxes sure sounds like a lot, more than most Americans earn. Feels just as real a whack to the $500K earners as the $9K feels to the $50K earners.

At $5M, you pay $2.5M. Real money? Sure. A whack? Sure. Makes the $500K/$184K situation seem like peanuts.

Main point is this. Whacked is a relative concept, and saying a certain amount is “real” while lesser amounts are not is a-hole.

As pre-tax income increases, your ability to spend/save does not go up linearly. At $50K, after-tax is $41K. At $500K, it is $316K. So a 10x increase in pre-tax only results in a 7.7x increase after-tax. Boo hoo hoo, so sad. At $5M, after tax is $2.5M. So another 10x the pre-tax is 7.9x the after-tax. Such struggle!

Nada, While I dislike high taxes in NYC vs other states, I completely agree with you. I am not even talking about NYC has more opportunities to make big $s vs other places with lower taxes. Thanks Aaron for providing some real color.

My kids are actually free range, cages only at night and during time outs.

As for being whacked by taxes, you can boo-hoo all you want. The simple fact is that as income rises, taxes rise faster, and what you get declines. I would live in Sweden and pay Swedish taxes bc you get a lot for them: safety, cleanliness, great infrastructure, a highly functional health system, and very clean govt. Or I could pay just a couple percentage points less in tax and get NYC which has none of the virtues of Sweden. Instead, my mind switches to how to minimize this enormous expense in my life, and Nowhere starts looking better and better. At least my taxes aren't so flagrantly wasted or stolen in Nowhere as they are in NYC.

Where is nowhere

"Nowhere" is a derisive term for places that New Yorkers might like to live that are beyond Manhattan and certain parts of Brooklyn. Nowheres range from Northeast Harbor to Miami Beach to Tahoe.

George, I agree with you about taxes and what you get for them in NYC (I truly do) but where are $500k and $1mm plus jobs in Sweden? Even $200k jobs are rare there.

Another source of the East Coast snobbery is that our educational infrastructure is very strong throughout the Tri-State.

Building great schools takes money, lots of it, and that's not sloshing around in places that people move to to avoid taxes. Even if you tell me that Portland, Austin, Charlotte are wonderful places to live...are you envisioning that ten years from now, these very ambitious and competitive people are going to prefer their top-tier schools to Tri-State.. I don't know ... third-tier schools?

Or are you just envisioning a world in which Deerfield gets 20,000 applicants ten years from now?

>> Where is nowhere

Nowhere is George’s derisive name for places he once used to deride. No one else here derided such places as far as I can tell. George seems to have a love-hate relationship with his Nowhere. On the one hand, he extolls its virtues. On the other hand, he’s still here. No matter what, however, he won’t say anything about where his Nowhere is because he seems ashamed of it.

It’s like the guy in high school who’s dating what he perceives to be a girl who is “beneath” him, so won’t reveal anything about her to his friends. It’s OK bud, we all love you no matter what: if that’s who you love, we’re sure she’s great!

I have to confess that I might have started the “Nowhere” thing, and George just picked up the theme. I am born and bred in Nowhere, and while I do wholly appreciate its many redeeming traits, I’d rather be in NY. I write this from Nowhere at the moment, and I admit fully that I am actually quite happy here, but I’d still rather be in NY.

With all that said, I share what I perceive to be Inonada’s annoyance that George won’t share the specifics of his Nowhere. No fun at all.

Shame on you, MCR! You’ve given George a complex.

Not annoyed by George. He’ll tell us his girlfriend’s name when he is good & ready.

Another headwind for the real estate recovery: NY is determined to have the highest taxes in the nation.

https://nypost.com/2021/02/28/albany-progressives-drive-away-job-creators-with-tax-hike/