Jump to content
YurytheRed

Staying in Jersey

Recommended Posts

this is a great discussion, keep it coming. I'm two yrs away from sending my son off to college, then I could maybe convince my wife to relocate w/my FIL. Honestly, I do love NJ. Great deer hunting, fishing..conveniences of the city and the ocean...but the taxes hurt, and it only gets worse. I'm not sure where we'll retire...she watches those Caribbean lifestyle shows and this homey is German/Italian and needs to bath in SPF 100, so the Carolina's is probably my style.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will be checking out Tn in April. Still have 3-1/2 yrs until my youngest finishes high school so plenty of time to look around 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎2‎/‎9‎/‎2019 at 8:38 PM, stratocaster said:

  Seriously>>>>>> "Lots of SSI, welfare, and foodstamps to pay for down there."   If you put up some evidence to support your statement I might have believed it. Again, WADR.   

But since you didn't, I will.  The following list is the amount of welfare spent by each state for 2107.  

1. California               $103 billion

2. New York               $61 billion

3. Texas                       $35 billion

4. Florida                    $27 billion

5. Pennsylvania       $27 billion

6. Illinois                   $21 billion

7. Ohio                        $20 billion

8. Massachusetts  $19 billion

9. New Jersey          $17 billion

10. Michigan            $16 billion

7 of those 10 state were blue states as of 2016 and only 2 were "down there".   

So not to bore you with accounting jargon or sleight of hand or to make this any longer than it has to be. 

In 2017, the CA state budget was $184 billion, with the state spending $103 billion on welfare.  Do you think the $103 billion came out of state coffers?  Nope.   In 2018(I don't have the data ,for 2017) 55% of the $103 billion or $56 billion came from the federal govt.    So in terms of TOTAL DOLLARS which is what really matters,  the amount of welfare $$$$ alone going to CA from DC is huge.  Out of 39 million people in CA 13.3% or 5.2 million are in poverty.  More than any other state.  Is CA in the south?  I'm talking total dollars and total numbers. 

True in absolute numbers those are high, but those states also have very high relative populations in general so of course the numbers are going to be bigger even if they had 'welfare' recipients at the same or lower rate of general welfare occurrence, and while you are correct that the "Fed" kicks in a portion of those payments... where did the feds get the money from in the first place. 

So for California (since it is at the top of the list) if you look at it at it's highest level of aggregation, California is actually a slight net contributor to the Federal Gov't  (pretty close to break-even actually).  So while they get a healthy amount of money from the feds... they also contribute more than they take, in effect they are just getting their money back.

The NY office of the controller usually does a state balance of payments with the Federal Gov't report which includes all the states' data and ranks the states by contribution to the feds.  It also includes a much finer detail of the gross and per capita amounts for revenue and expenditures.  For fiscal year 2017 they calculated that 11 states are net contributors to the federal coffers, led by NJ (on both a total and per capita basis)

The report is here  https://www.osc.state.ny.us/reports/budget/2018/federal-budget-fiscal-year-2017.pdf 

As with all data, there are many ways to look at it and interpret it, and of course there are many nuances which aren't always captured by the figures, but just thought this was interesting and would pass it on.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Bergenguy said:

True in absolute numbers those are high, but those states also have very high relative populations in general so of course the numbers are going to be bigger even if they had 'welfare' recipients at the same or lower rate of general welfare occurrence, and while you are correct that the "Fed" kicks in a portion of those payments... where did the feds get the money from in the first place. 

So for California (since it is at the top of the list) if you look at it at it's highest level of aggregation, California is actually a slight net contributor to the Federal Gov't  (pretty close to break-even actually).  So while they get a healthy amount of money from the feds... they also contribute more than they take, in effect they are just getting their money back.

The NY office of the controller usually does a state balance of payments with the Federal Gov't report which includes all the states' data and ranks the states by contribution to the feds.  It also includes a much finer detail of the gross and per capita amounts for revenue and expenditures.  For fiscal year 2017 they calculated that 11 states are net contributors to the federal coffers, led by NJ (on both a total and per capita basis)

The report is here  https://www.osc.state.ny.us/reports/budget/2018/federal-budget-fiscal-year-2017.pdf 

As with all data, there are many ways to look at it and interpret it, and of course there are many nuances which aren't always captured by the figures, but just thought this was interesting and would pass it on.

Thanks for this info.  I am going to look through it in detail.

The aspect of this that I think needs to stop is the transfer of wealth from the states to the Feds only to be re-allocated back to the states.  If the money is going to go back to the states, why take it in the first place?  The only reason is a redistribution of wealth (which this is) from the Federal government.  It is this aspect that motivates me to eliminate it entirely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I ask myself weekly why I'm still here. Went back to the Cranford/Westfield area this weekend, I don't know how I did it. Moved 50 miles west 5 years ago, but it wasn't far enough. One day...

I refuse to die in NJ.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys -

 

I was born and raised in NJ and did fine with a decent paying job,  the fishing, hunting and other recreational opportunities.  Having New York City and Philadelphia within an hour was huge for the entertainment opportunities.  The food choices are endless and some of the very best of the best is within easy reach.  The educational opportunities are also topnotch and widely varied.

New Jersey is a great state to live in, when you are working.  Not so much when you are out of a job.  

 

Back in 2001 my company closed its plant and punched my ticket.  We looked around , as far south as northern North Carolina and as far west as Gettysburg, PA.

I cannot stand Florida.  it is far too hot and sticky for far too long and there are far too many retirees down there waiting to croak.     Georgia and SC have the same problem with hot weather and I didn't have enough money for two places. 

I got a job in northern DE in 2002 and we found a place in central DE in 2003. 

I traded a 2000 sq. ft. Bilevel  on 100'X 125' in central NJ for an 1800 Sq. Ft. colonial cape on 10 acres, with a 30'X50' pole barn, and a brand new Kubota tractor with three implements in central DE.    My taxes went from $6500 a year to under $1000 per year.  There is no sales tax in DE.  

Since I was boarding out my horse in NJ and was able to move the horse onto my own property,  that saved me at least and additional $2000 a year. 

 

FWIW, since we qualify for an age related reduction to our property taxes,  our tax bill is still under $100/year and there still is no sales tax.    I have since retired. 

DE does not have the sporting opportunities that neighboring states have, but  I can still drive to them and now I have the money to do it with. 

Short of having  a place in GA for the winter and a place in the north or north central part of the US for summer, the Delmarva works pretty well for us.

 

RayG

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Haskell_Hunter said:

Thanks for this info.  I am going to look through it in detail.

The aspect of this that I think needs to stop is the transfer of wealth from the states to the Feds only to be re-allocated back to the states.  If the money is going to go back to the states, why take it in the first place?  The only reason is a redistribution of wealth (which this is) from the Federal government.  It is this aspect that motivates me to eliminate it entirely.

Exactly the point HH.  

9 hours ago, Bergenguy said:

True in absolute numbers those are high, but those states also have very high relative populations in general so of course the numbers are going to be bigger even if they had 'welfare' recipients at the same or lower rate of general welfare occurrence, and while you are correct that the "Fed" kicks in a portion of those payments... where did the feds get the money from in the first place. 

So for California (since it is at the top of the list) if you look at it at it's highest level of aggregation, California is actually a slight net contributor to the Federal Gov't  (pretty close to break-even actually).  So while they get a healthy amount of money from the feds... they also contribute more than they take, in effect they are just getting their money back.

The NY office of the controller usually does a state balance of payments with the Federal Gov't report which includes all the states' data and ranks the states by contribution to the feds.  It also includes a much finer detail of the gross and per capita amounts for revenue and expenditures.  For fiscal year 2017 they calculated that 11 states are net contributors to the federal coffers, led by NJ (on both a total and per capita basis)

The report is here  https://www.osc.state.ny.us/reports/budget/2018/federal-budget-fiscal-year-2017.pdf 

As with all data, there are many ways to look at it and interpret it, and of course there are many nuances which aren't always captured by the figures, but just thought this was interesting and would pass it on.

"California, with 12% of the American population, is home today to about one in three of the nation’s welfare recipients."  <<<<<So as a statistic, 30 % of ALL the welfare recipients in the US are in CA, 2.5x the percentage that the population of CA is of the entire nation.  Those are not my statistics here is the link. 

https://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-jackson-california-poverty-20180114-story.html

 The numbers of people on welfare in CA should be in line or lower than the rate of general welfare occurrence as you state it should be, but it's not. 

 The overall poverty rate for the USA in 2017 was 12.3%. California's was 13.3% so it is a full 9% higher than the general welfare occurance.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/9/2019 at 6:47 AM, YurytheRed said:

No doubt there are endless reasons to leave the state, cost, corruption etc., yet here we are. Why???? For me it's kids and the wifey. When the former are finished with their schooling I'm gone with or without the latter....:peace: 

I used to say the exact same thing and then GRANDCHILDREN showed up I have more enjoyment with them than I can find in any other state. F--K the politicians, taxes and all the other BS here in NJ I cannot get this in any other state. The pictures say it all.

NJH.JPG

IMG_0849.JPG

JAKE & COLTON 2.jpg

1 (2).jpg

Edited by bushden
  • Like 3
  • Winner 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, bushden said:

I used to say the exact same thing and then GRANDCHILDREN showed up I have more enjoyment with them than I can find in any other state. F--K the politicians, taxes and all the other BS here in NJ I cannot get this in any other state. The pictures say it all.

NJH.JPG

IMG_0849.JPG

JAKE & COLTON 2.jpg

1 (2).jpg

I cannot argue against such lovely truth.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, bushden said:

…..  GRANDCHILDREN showed up I have more enjoyment with them than I can find in any other state. F--K the politicians, taxes and all the other BS here in NJ I cannot get this in any other state. The pictures say it all.

You put it perfectly, bushden! You're a very lucky man. I hope to have the same joys as you … in a few short years.

My wife's parents retired and moved to Wayne County, Pennsylvania. They did well in the sale of their home here, and built a nice little house right on a small lake out there. Have a small dock with a little fishing boat, bought a couple jet-skis, have a few simple spare bedrooms for people to stay in. A real nice set up.

But, their many grandchildren were all still back here in NJ. And, the kids' weekends were full of all kinds of activities here, all year long. So, many, many weekends … it was the grandparents having to drive back to NJ, to be a part of their grandchildren's lives.

I'm staying in Joisey. I may not be able to strap on a Glock when I go out to buy a gallon of milk, but I'll have my grandkids.

To each, his own.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The best is to do 6 months in Florida and 6 in NJ. Declare residence in the sunshine state. That's my goal, but now we are babysitting grandkids. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, BothBarrels said:

You put it perfectly, bushden! You're a very lucky man. I hope to have the same joys as you … in a few short years.

My wife's parents retired and moved to Wayne County, Pennsylvania. They did well in the sale of their home here, and built a nice little house right on a small lake out there. Have a small dock with a little fishing boat, bought a couple jet-skis, have a few simple spare bedrooms for people to stay in. A real nice set up.

But, their many grandchildren were all still back here in NJ. And, the kids' weekends were full of all kinds of activities here, all year long. So, many, many weekends … it was the grandparents having to drive back to NJ, to be a part of their grandchildren's lives.

I'm staying in Joisey. I may not be able to strap on a Glock when I go out to buy a gallon of milk, but I'll have my grandkids.

To each, his own.

YOU GOT TO LOVE IT.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×