opinions from your high horse are amusing :hihi:

I missed where you tried to defend those states where their policy seems to be "love the fetus, could care less about the baby and the mom"

your snarkiness is boring and such a bad look for an adult male.

Not sure where you got your 15K figure from but it appears you still might be better off in CT.

State
Mean Household Income
New Jersey $114,691
Connecticut $113,031
Massachusetts $111,498
Maryland $111,417
California $106,916
Hawaii $103,780
New York $101,945
Virginia $101,746
New Hampshire $99,165
Washington $98,983
Alaska $98,606
Colorado $96,970
Minnesota $93,925
Illinois $92,395
Utah $91,292
Delaware $90,092
Rhode Island $89,093
Texas $87,260
North Dakota $85,476
Pennsylvania $84,849
Oregon $84,258
Georgia $82,406
Wyoming $81,880
Nevada $81,496
Vermont $81,233
Arizona $80,779
Wisconsin $80,674
Florida $80,286
Nebraska $80,208
Kansas $80,009
Iowa $78,411
Michigan $78,400
Ohio $76,958
North Carolina $76,940
South Dakota $76,240
Maine $76,227
Missouri $76,060
Indiana $75,025
Tennessee $74,750
Montana $74,190
Idaho $73,810
South Carolina $73,520
Oklahoma $72,695
Louisiana $71,001
Kentucky $70,144
Alabama $69,842
New Mexico $69,077
Arkansas $66,557
West Virginia $63,680
Mississippi $62,835

here’s my defense of those states…that’s where americans are choosing to move, in larger numbers than they are moving to blue states

can you tell me what i’m getting for the hundreds of thousands of dollars extra i give to the state if CT? i asked you that before, you said “services.”. i asked you to elaborate, and i didn’t see you respond.

we do have that busway that nobody rides.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

higher salary. Look at any salary type stat (aver, median). Much higher in CT.

What you are not getting in Ct is less $ spent on babies and their moms.

You're an outlier.

If it was as simple as red v blue then West Virginia, Louisiana and Mississippi wouldn’t be losing population
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

nope. many many people
can now move to a cheaper state and keon their salary.

it’s demonstrably false to say i’m an outlier.

ive worked at aetna, travelers, and the hartford, ive never heard of an existing employee being forced to take a pay cut when they move to another state.

job postings for new hires will often have higher salaries in blue states. but those salaries are usually then portable

You’re just wrong and making stuff up.

Yup, that extra $$ spent on moms and babies has eliminated all the problems in Bridgeport and hartford.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

How am I making things up when I showed you stats that shows the states that are trying/banning abortion all seem to spend far less $ on babies and the moms? That shows that their philosophy seems to be "show some concern for the fetus (but don't provide $ for vitamins for the mom) but none for the baby or mom". Ignoring all the stats and claiming someone posting the stats is "making things up" is Disingenuous.


I also showed you the average salary (the article had median salary which is a better stat) is far higher in Ct than many of the red states - higher than the 15K you said you would save by moving.

You're an outlier bc most people aren't in a position where they can have their wives stay home to care for their kids bc of their salary (while making some sacrifices). Same as me where my wife and I could pay our mortgage off in 20 years and never have to borrow $ for cars. Most people can't do that these days. I recognize that, I'm not so sure you do.

"hen I worked at Travelers for my first job and they were going to regional offices and my boss was going and asked me to consider it he said you can keep your salary but your raises will be lower"

Then YOU are the outlier.

Even if that's true, if your salary stayed the same but future raises were lower, what's the effect of smaller future raises compared to no income tax and much cheaper college education for your kids?

"How am I making things up when I showed you stats that shows the states that are trying/banning abortion all seem to spend far less $ on babies and the moms?"

You showed that results are different FOR PEOPLE CURRENTLY LIVING THERE. That doesn't mean if I moved to TN, I'm going to eat fried twinkies all day and take meth and stop caring about my kids' education. You're also assuming that the state is the reason for the difference in results. That's a big, big assumption.

Paul, if I wanted the state to take care of me, you're right, I'm better off in CT than I am in FL or TN. But if I want to work hard and be left alone, I'm way better off elsewhere.

This is why CT is losing people like me. CT is great if you're wealthy, and better than the south if you want to live off the state. For people between those two extremes, financially you're WAY better off in a well run red state. Americans are seeing that, and acting on it.

When you make a city or state as attractive as possible for people who don't want to take care of themselves, and as difficult as possible for people who want to be left alone, this is what you get.

You admitted that the only "service" I get in CT that I wouldn't get elsewhere, is better welfare. Well, that's not a reason for me to stay and fork over hundreds of thousands of dollars to the state that I'd get to keep if I moved. And others see the same thing, and are fleeing.

I never admitted any such thing. Ive been steadfast in not discussing one state vs another as you keep trying to do. I'm looking at the country as a whole and posted interesting stats showing that those states who want to do away with abortion seem to not care about the babies and moms after the baby is born. It seems to me there is a common thread in many of the stats posted. Show no concern for people less fortunate as long as the taxes are lower.

CEO of Goldman Sachs said basically same thing as my boss. He said if you're not coming in to NYC don't expect NYC salaries.

i’ve never, not once, heard of an existing employee being forced to take a lower salary because they moved.

People wouldn’t be moving to these states if their salaries got slashed. there’s the proof paul. people are moving because they expect their lives will improve.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

if that’s not what you admitted, then tell me what my kids and i get for the hundreds of thousands of dollars in extra taxes i’ll pay in CT over my career. for that amount of money, shouldn’t i expect a lot?? and i can’t think of anything.

oh i get why guy don’t want to discuss states. If i were a liberal, it’s the last thing I’d want to discuss. but looking at states tells a story.

if the people you say are neglected by their state are really neglected, why don’t they move?

some people
make unhealthy or unproductive choices, some people
make better choices, it has very little to do with what the state does.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

you are funding the failed red states where the populations can't compete with the superior blue states and need your handouts to survive...hopefully they will send you some moonshine to show their appreciation....

i’m expecting a care package of fried twinkies and meth from those i support in Hollis NH, where you can’t get a house for less than $700k.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

maybe a pair of overalls? :btu:

Take it up w/the CEO.

Look at the median salaries. Taxes are only one aspect.

"100s of K of higher salaries. Look at the median salaries by states"

You're assuming that salary is due to the state. I can destroy that, by saying, correctly, that huge numbers of people move from CT to cheaper states and keep their same salaries. The CT state government doesn't set median salary in the state.

"And If I was a cons. the last thing I would want to discuss is any stats showing how bad the conser. states are."

Hollis and Brookline (in NH) are bad? Franklin TN is bad? The suburbs of Charlotte (like Fort Mill, SC) are bad?

WDMSO posted a link that said FL had the hottest real estate price growth in the nation. That cannot happen in a bad state.

Rich people from CT who move to FL, don't turn into swamp hillbillies. The state government doesn't influence that. People decide that for themselves.

"Look at the median salaries."

My salary would stay the same. Other people's salary is their concern.

"Taxes are only one aspect."

True. Red states also offer cheaper college, utilities, food, gas, etc. And even if you live in a place with crappy schools (which you don't have to), you can use your tax savings to go to catholic school.

I posted a study from US News and World Report. The public high schools in Franklin TN and Hollis NH were ranked way higher than the public high school in Southington CT where I live. Way, way higher.

What I can get in some red states - Same exact salary, lower taxes, better schools.

Go to a Catholic school, OMG that's funny, better like to play with the priest and be able to take a licking from the nun. The pope was just in Canada on another sh*t we Catholics can't apologize enough tour, the most fu*ked up bunch ever.

right. never mind smaller classes, higher test scores, and no woke liberal bullsh*t. at a far lower price then what public schools spend per pupil.

the catholic K-8 school in my town has 8-10 kids per class, has insane average test scores, and charges about $5200 a year. the public schools in my town have lower test scores, triple the average class size,,and spend $14k per kid


lemme guess from the stupid and bigoted comment of yours, you went to public school. it shows.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Point out a few outliers in a set and claim that (or try to) is indicative of the whole set. LOL.

Yup damn good time, played on the varsity tennis, wrestling and soccer teams. The wife who went to Catholic school hated every minute and has commented many times she wished she had access to any kind of sports program. She's got some good (if you like BS and mind torture) stories, you can have your religion buddy, it's perfect for you and clearly you probably have had it drilled (hope not from behind) into you.

Catholic schools are great. If you are amongst the few who can afford them or be lucky enough to get a free ride.

and if more states had taxes like NH or FL, would that increase or decrease the number of people
who could afford them?

how about school
choice? does that increase or decrease the number of people
who could afford them?

if your blue states care so much about lifting people out of poverty, why do they oppose school choice? why forced those kids to be stuck in failing schools?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

i never ever said all towns in all
red states were great. LOL. i said there are terrible places in red states. So even you will employ the tired liberal tactic of responding to something that i never came close to saying.

here’s what i said.

There are some towns in america that offer a very high quality of life with very low taxes. And from what i can tell, all of them are in red states

They may be outliers, those nice suburbs in red states, but that’s where people are moving.

Paul, if there are any beautiful suburbs in blue states that have super low taxes, can you list some please? or are all such places in red states?

If certain places can offer a high quality of life at an affordable price, isn’t it possible they are doing something right? isnt it possible they’re doing something that maybe we should replicate and expand on?

CT is also an outlier because of fairfield county. doesn’t stop you from saying the whole state is represented by the data from greenwich and westport.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

And you continue to try to employ the tired cons. tactic of basically saying "it is better for me" while ignoring everyone else.

How about we try to make our public schools better instead of giving some $ to people who can use that to subsidize non public schools while taking funds away from public schools. Maybe we can go back to the segregation academies that were so common in the south after Brown v BOE.

sure we can try to change/improve public schools, but teachers unions make that practically impossible. Liberals tend to think that “improve” means, spend more money. Catholic schools are concrete proof that student performance isn’t correlated with spending, especially when all the spending goes to teacher benefits that have nothing to do with student performance

Paul, i’m pretty sure i’ve heard liberals describe themselves as pro choice. why not offer the choice? if you’re pro choice, you should
support school choice.

how the heck do you go from school
choice to segregated schools? poor black people
desperately want school choice. why would they ask for crappy segregated schools? are you saying that the darkies are too stupid to know what’s best for their kids?

good lord your are a smug elitist when you want to be.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device