Hey, there! Log in / Register
Bay State population has actually increased slightly; the people leaving are mostly not the well to do, study says
By adamg on Tue, 09/17/2024 - 9:33am
The Massachusetts Budget and Policy Center took a look at IRS and Census data through 2023 and found that not only did the Massachusetts population increase - even if just very, very slightly - between 2022 and 2023, most of the people who did leave the state were young people and families making under $200,000. The center says this has policy implications - such as tamping down talk of requiring tax breaks to keep the state deflating like a punctured tire (although the center did note the data don't reflect the impact of the rich-people tax).
Neighborhoods:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
Some of the elderly, those underserved …
… by our fine medical establishments and the poor who are leaving are going into the ground or the crematorium. Not fast enough for some. Once you’re perceived as being of no future use it’s expected of you.
The fortunate ones who are adults can find better conditions elsewhere have the means to move out of state and have that option. But they take away resources with them. And are missed. Some of the “useless” one too.
The elderly aren't the ones
The elderly aren't the ones we should be worried about. Boomers have spent decades being greedy NIMBYs so now working class people have nowhere to live. Every other residential project getting approved around here is for seniors or 55 plus(how is this not age discrimination?).
I have no idea why we are catering to people who have hoarded all the property and no longer work at the expense of people who keep this community going by staffing the hospitals, teaching the children, driving the buses etc. Boomers lucked into the most profitable time in human history and then did everything they could to pull up the ladder behind them to screw over younger generations.
Boomers are the elderly.
Many boomers are poorer than you’ll ever be, if you’re lucky, except maybe concerning the brain and the heart departments.
Boomers screw each other just like every generation, every ethnicity screws each other and anyone else they can. They are no worse or better than past or younger generations.
Go throw more punches at your boomer punching bag and then cry a little.
@Lee
As a late bloomer baby boomer I approve this message.
Duh
Did we really need a study to tell us that the rich of Massachusetts are fine and the rest of us are screwed? That's just common sense. Didn't stop Maura and the Legislature from undermining the Fair Share Amendment by lowering taxes on the wealthy while giving the rest of us scraps in the form of modest increases to the renters tax deduction.
Of course they did
That's the outcome of voting Democrat.
So ...
Had we voted for the local crop of GOP candidates, do you think they would do better?
LOL.
Absolutely not
And I would have dragged the MA electorate for voting Republican.
That's a libertarian for you
Libertarians never win anything except podunk elections where they depend on low turnout, so of course they can be above it all (and beside the point).
That's my favorite thing about elections
You can win them 1-0-0.
I love how the electorate deems Libertarians unserious, then gives 74 million votes to a guy who thinks windmills cause cancer.
Classic fallacy
People making a bad choice doesn't mean that your alternative is a good choice.
Okay
Then write in Chris Rock like I may well do.
Nah
Only a fool indulges in such self-stroking behavior.
Sort of?
It's the outcome of voting for Healey over Chang-Diaz, who was sitting right there in the Democratic primary while Maura hedged further and further to the center without any meaningful pushback.
Same people
Who voted for Hillary and Biden in primaries over Bernie and Liz.
Those people deserved the first Trump presidency. They deserve a second one, too.
You do know...
You do know that none of those people are on the ballot now, right? For president, that is - Liz is up for reelection.
Yes
I'm not the first person who's ever written about history.
DISREGARD
I thought my prior comment was denested.
Not just the "rich" benefit
According to this report, the majority of the monies went towards education and transportation initiatives, including school lunches and buying more electric buses.
Could it be that the surtax the "rich" pay are coming back in the form of tax breaks, thus bringing a net zero overall? That is, are the "rich" paying that $40K minimum surtax, knowing it'll come back in their pockets another way? If so, the Fair Share initiative was more a wink-and-a-nod between the legislators and the "rich," and voted in by gullible and envious voters, despite bringing in a lot of money for needed programs.