Millennials fuel Metro-North ridership surge

[NY1635]

Yup! If the LIRR had its way, it would be a system from Penn to Montauk (summers only, Babylon other times), Huntington, Hempstead, Long Beach and Ronkonkoma.

 

In all honesty though, once 3rd track and 2nd track are finished, the LIRR NEEDS to up its game on weekend/off peak service. They'll have no excuses for construction. They need to do more expresses, and frequent service on at least the above mentioned core system.

 

Long Islanders in certain communities have been opposing any form of development in an attempt to preserve their suburban quality of life. These are also the same people who complain about the parking fees at newly renovated Coliseum, and complain about the long commute from the city to the island without putting two and two together.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Long Islanders in certain communities have been opposing any form of development in an attempt to preserve their suburban quality of life. These are also the same people who complain about the parking fees at newly renovated Coliseum, and complain about the long commute from the city to the island without putting two and two together.

Long Island is trying to do it the right way and I don't blame them.  It seems as if every suburban area with charm these days is under siege.  We have the same thing going on my neighborhood.  We have preservation organizations that fight tooth and nail to keep the neighborhood the way that its been, and quite frankly, without such organizations, Long Island and many other communities would be overrun and overdeveloped.  The peace and tranquility that many of us desire and fight to preserve is constantly under attack by greedy developers who honestly don't give a damn about maintaining the standards that have been established.  Neighborhoods have to be protected so that they grow organically, otherwise you get what is occurring in places like Staten Island.  Tons of over development.  Beautiful historical houses from the 1900's being torn down and replaced with three or four ugly townhouses, and traffic that is out of control as each household has two to three cars.  Development has its place, but it needs to be done in a smart manner.  Long Island needs more infrastructure improvements before trying to build like crazy, and I also agree that the LIRR needs to improve a ton.  It's a tough balance because Long Island needs to attract young folks who earn well and can afford to live there otherwise the taxes will keep spiraling out of control.

[RR503]

Long Island is trying to do it the right way and I don't blame them.  It seems as if every suburban area with charm these days is under siege.  We have the same thing going on my neighborhood.  We have preservation organizations that fight tooth and nail to keep the neighborhood the way that its been, and quite frankly, without such organizations, Long Island and many other communities would be overrun and overdeveloped.  The peace and tranquility that many of us desire and fight to preserve is constantly under attack by greedy developers who honestly don't give a damn about maintaining the standards that have been established.  Neighborhoods have to be protected so that they grow organically, otherwise you get what is occurring in places like Staten Island.  Tons of over development.  Beautiful historical houses from the 1900's being torn down and replaced with three or four ugly townhouses, and traffic that is out of control as each household has two to three cars.  Development has its place, but it needs to be done in a smart manner.  Long Island needs more infrastructure improvements before trying to build like crazy, and I also agree that the LIRR needs to improve a ton.  It's a tough balance because Long Island needs to attract young folks who earn well and can afford to live there otherwise the taxes will keep spiraling out of control.

 

This is the attitude that got Long Island into the sorry state of affairs it is in now. I agree that preservation of historically significant/relevant housing is a must -- hence landmarks -- but as much as I love the Island, very little of its endless sprawl falls into that category. Long Island's problem is that whenever some developer comes wanting to build apartments near a train station, or revitalize a downtown, Islanders see it as an attack on their way of life, saying the exact same things that you do above. Problem is, it isn't. No one is condemning your house in Levittown to build something in downtown Farmingdale. Because of this anti-anything-that-is-not-homogenous-sprawl mentality, LI is bleeding young people like it has been shot. As you quite correctly point out, if Nassau/Suffolk Counties want to have a tax structure that is less than obscene, they've got to do something about this. If the County governments quit pandering to the 'change in any form is blasphemy' crowd, maybe something can be done. Until then, I'll sit back and watch millenials flee suburbia on the Railroad. 

[Via Garibaldi 8]

This is the attitude that got Long Island into the sorry state of affairs it is in now. I agree that preservation of historically significant/relevant housing is a must -- hence landmarks -- but as much as I love the Island, very little of its endless sprawl falls into that category. Long Island's problem is that whenever some developer comes wanting to build apartments near a train station, or revitalize a downtown, Islanders see it as an attack on their way of life, saying the exact same things that you do above. Problem is, it isn't. No one is condemning your house in Levittown to build something in downtown Farmingdale. Because of this anti-anything-that-is-not-homogenous-sprawl mentality, LI is bleeding young people like it has been shot. As you quite correctly point out, if Nassau/Suffolk Counties want to have a tax structure that is less than obscene, they've got to do something about this. If the County governments quit pandering to the 'change in any form is blasphemy' crowd, maybe something can be done. Until then, I'll sit back and watch millenials flee suburbia on the Railroad. 

Actually they're right though.  Developers don't give a damn about charm or the preservation of neighborhoods.  They care about their investment and maximizing it, even if it destroys neighborhoods in the process.  Believe me, when you hear about charming neighborhoods with very little change, it's usually because the people that live there are heavily involved in preserving it.  Now I do agree that Long Island will have to see development of some kind if it wants to attract young people, but it has be done in a way that works for both the developers and the community.  What happens sometimes is rezoning takes affect, the developers run to cash in and start building all sorts of garbage so that they can run in and run out and move on to the next project.  You look at places like the Upper East Side.  Their historic district has been preserved because they've fought tooth and nail to keep it that way.  The new buildings going up in the historic area are within the size and scope of other buildings, which is how it should be.  The other issue is how is Long Island going to cope with such development when it can't even handle the current population from an infrastructure standpoint?  Traffic on a lot of the island is atrocious, and will only worsen as time goes on.  When people talk about development usually infrastructure is left out, and it's a very important area to cover because it plays a big role in how the community functions and will function in the future.  

[RR503]

Actually they're right though.  Developers don't give a damn about charm or the preservation of neighborhoods.  They care about their investment and maximizing it, even if it destroys neighborhoods in the process.  Believe me, when you hear about charming neighborhoods with very little change, it's usually because the people that live there are heavily involved in preserving it.  Now I do agree that Long Island will have to see development of some kind if it wants to attract young people, but it has be done in a way that works for both the developers and the community.  What happens sometimes is rezoning takes affect, the developers run to cash in and start building all sorts of garbage so that they can run in and run out and move on to the next project.  You look at places like the Upper East Side.  Their historic district has been preserved because they've fought tooth and nail to keep it that way.  The new buildings going up in the historic area are within the size and scope of other buildings, which is how it should be.  The other issue is how is Long Island going to cope with such development when it can't even handle the current population from an infrastructure standpoint?  Traffic on a lot of the island is atrocious, and will only worsen as time goes on.  When people talk about development usually infrastructure is left out, and it's a very important area to cover because it plays a big role in how the community functions and will function in the future.

 

Not to insult the island, but aside from areas like Garden City, do you really find the island's interminable sprawl charming? Most of the houses there were put up by the very developers you hate so much in a haphazard fashion. They aren't architectural gems, just utilitarian structures. Community preservation is important, I don't disagree, but communities on the Island don't know the difference between preservation and obstructionism, and that's where my qualms lie.

 

As for infrastructure, once Prince Andrew finishes 3rd track, ESA, 2nd track, and 110 BRT, there'll be a lot more in terms of public transit. Developers are getting involved with these things now (see 110/Republic Hub), so I think there is hope. The one thing that needs to happen though is the LIRR needs to stop raising fares. They're becoming absolutely untenanable. Or, if not, the State should subsidize fares for low income residents so NICE/SCT can stop being LIRR lite, and start acting as feeder buses.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Not to insult the island, but aside from areas like Garden City, do you really find the island's interminable sprawl charming? Most of the houses there were put up by the very developers you hate so much in a haphazard fashion. They aren't architectural gems, just utilitarian structures. Community preservation is important, I don't disagree, but communities on the Island don't know the difference between preservation and obstructionism, and that's where my qualms lie.

 

As for infrastructure, once Prince Andrew finishes 3rd track, ESA, 2nd track, and 110 BRT, there'll be a lot more in terms of public transit. Developers are getting involved with these things now (see 110/Republic Hub), so I think there is hope. The one thing that needs to happen though is the LIRR needs to stop raising fares. They're becoming absolutely untenanable. Or, if not, the State should subsidize fares for low income residents so NICE/SCT can stop being LIRR lite, and start acting as feeder buses.

You really think that the LIRR is going to stop raising the fares? Fat chance.  I believe a good portion of both LIRR and MNRR commuters have average household incomes over $100,000, and since those are the folks buying the monthly passes most of the time and paying the high fares, don't expect them to lower them, especially with MNRR & LIRR salaries on the rise along with pension costs and healthcare.  I will say that MNRR is more responsive to that.  They seem to know that their intermediate riders are fairly poor (those people going from the South Bronx to say Yonkers) and they've kept the fare at $3.00 despite raising the prices now twice in the last few years.  That really pisses me off, but the LIRR wouldn't do such a thing.  It's another way that Long Island tries to push the poor out.  Transportation is generally scarce in the suburbs and the commuter rails are expensive.  You also are starting to see the areas close to the city border that aren't that expensive see a rise in prices.  I'm sure that will have an impact on the people just making it since they are the folks that will likely take a bus to the subway.  Moving to the suburbs these days just means getting a little more space for your money, but it isn't that much cheaper than living in NYC, and the folks that will suffer the most are the poor.  They'll be pushed further out where transportation costs are higher and options scare, and they'll be forced to likely move outside of NY entirely to survive.

[RR503]

You really think that the LIRR is going to stop raising the fares? Fat chance.  I believe a good portion of both LIRR and MNRR commuters have average household incomes over $100,000, and since those are the folks buying the monthly passes most of the time and paying the high fares, don't expect them to lower them, especially with MNRR & LIRR salaries on the rise along with pension costs and healthcare.  I will say that MNRR is more responsive to that.  They seem to know that their intermediate riders are fairly poor (those people going from the South Bronx to say Yonkers) and they've kept the fare at $3.00 despite raising the prices now twice in the last few years.  That really pisses me off, but the LIRR wouldn't do such a thing.  It's another way that Long Island tries to push the poor out.  Transportation is generally scarce in the suburbs and the commuter rails are expensive.  You also are starting to see the areas close to the city border that aren't that expensive see a rise in prices.  I'm sure that will have an impact on the people just making it since they are the folks that will likely take a bus to the subway.  Moving to the suburbs these days just means getting a little more space for your money, but it isn't that much cheaper than living in NYC, and the folks that will suffer the most are the poor.  They'll be pushed further out where transportation costs are higher and options scare, and they'll be forced to likely move outside of NY entirely to survive.

 

I don't think they'll stop raising fares, but I think they should. Yes, you are right, people who ride MNR and LIRR are generally well off, but that by no means means that there aren't poor in the suburbs. The whole central corridor of the Island is rife with poverty, a result of deindustrialization and urban migration. What I'm trying to get at is there are ways to fix the problems you describe. Subsidizing fares for the poor, for example. This would not only help reduce commute times and increase options for the economically disadvantaged, but it would also free up NICE and SCT from their positions as LIRR substitutes to act as feeder bus networks for the LIRR. Currently, the two are used largey by those who can't afford LIRR to travel along LIRR routes, making them redundant. Making the LIRR an option would help fix that.

 

But anyway, you've complained a bunch, and I've dreamed a bunch. What do you suggest?

[Via Garibaldi 8]

I don't think they'll stop raising fares, but I think they should. Yes, you are right, people who ride MNR and LIRR are generally well off, but that by no means means that there aren't poor in the suburbs. The whole central corridor of the Island is rife with poverty, a result of deindustrialization and urban migration. What I'm trying to get at is there are ways to fix the problems you describe. Subsidizing fares for the poor, for example. This would not only help reduce commute times and increase options for the economically disadvantaged, but it would also free up NICE and SCT from their positions as LIRR substitutes to act as feeder bus networks for the LIRR. Currently, the two are used largey by those who can't afford LIRR to travel along LIRR routes, making them redundant. Making the LIRR an option would help fix that.

 

But anyway, you've complained a bunch, and I've dreamed a bunch. What do you suggest?

For Long Island?  LOL Don't know because I don't live there, but if I did, I sure as hell wouldn't favor what you're proposing.  Subsidizing fares for the poor is a terrible idea and puts more of a burden of those who are already paying higher fares because ultimately anything that is subsidized will have to paid for by someone.  This is why Long Island continues to lose its middle class population because of out of control taxes.  If the poor can't afford to pay for their own fares that means they need to move somewhere cheaper.  The issue is people move to the suburbs and then try to turn them into urban centers.  Just doesn't work.  The fares keep going up because of out of control salaries, pensions and the like and until that gets under control, don't expect anything to change.

[RR503]

You realize that putting more people on empty trains will gain revenue, right? Imagine how much the LIRR would save if WH and Hempstead branch ridership increased a bit. 

 

And also, yes, if it needs to be subsidized, someone will be down some cash, you're right. But remember MTA is a STATE concern, not a county one, so the burden would be small and spread over a large population of people who can pay. And don't give me crap about how a voter in Oswego shouldn't pay for someone's train fare in Wyandanch. We all pay a bit to advance the greater good, that's what a government is for. 

[Via Garibaldi 8]

You realize that putting more people on empty trains will gain revenue, right? Imagine how much the LIRR would save if WH and Hempstead branch ridership increased a bit. 

 

And also, yes, if it needs to be subsidized, someone will be down some cash, you're right. But remember MTA is a STATE concern, not a county one, so the burden would be small and spread over a large population of people who can pay. And don't give me crap about how a voter in Oswego shouldn't pay for someone's train fare in Wyandanch. We all pay a bit to advance the greater good, that's what a government is for. 

Actually I will because we have more and more middle class people LEAVING because of over taxation.  The fewer people we have paying taxes, the more those who remain pay.  

 

http://www.democratandchronicle.com/story/news/local/2016/05/11/new-yorkers-leave-states-lower-taxes/84212658/

 

http://nypost.com/2016/09/15/taxpayers-are-fleeing-new-york-in-droves/

 

I laugh when people say oh taxpayers can just pay a little more.  

[RR503]

Actually I will because we have more and more middle class people LEAVING because of over taxation.  The fewer people we have paying taxes, the more those who remain pay.  

 

http://www.democratandchronicle.com/story/news/local/2016/05/11/new-yorkers-leave-states-lower-taxes/84212658/

 

http://nypost.com/2016/09/15/taxpayers-are-fleeing-new-york-in-droves/

 

I laugh when people say oh taxpayers can just pay a little more.  

 

Yes, I too can search "people leaving new york taxes" (no, seriously, the articles you link are the top 2 results). But I can also search NY population and see its increasing nicely, and search NY median income and see its increasing in line with the national average. Also note that property taxes are the big issue, not a revenue stream that the MTA gets much use of. 

 

I laugh when conservatives claim the sky is falling because of taxes. 

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Yes, I too can search "people leaving new york taxes" (no, seriously, the articles you link are the top 2 results). But I can also search NY population and see its increasing nicely, and search NY median income and see its increasing in line with the national average. Also note that property taxes are the big issue, not a revenue stream that the MTA gets much use of. 

 

I laugh when conservatives claim the sky is falling because of taxes. 

You can afford to laugh because you're likely not in the same tax bracket as I am.  Single professionals (in other words folks that aren't married) are taxed to death here in NYC. The advantage goes to those who are poor and/or don't work. No question about it.

[RR503]

Remind me how you can tax the unemployed? Oh, right, you can't. They have no income. 

 

FWIW, while you're right, I'm probably not in your bracket (probably below), I do know a bit about taxes. Yes, they're high compared to, say, Oklahoma City, but look what we get for it. Transit. Schools. Water. Roads. Parks. Police. Fire. Social Services. Healthcare. Oklahoma City has only some of those. Yes, those services have problems, but everything does. That's what attracts people to New York, people like the very young professionals that you claim are suffering. They want to live somewhere vibrant, dynamic, and well amenitized. New York provides that. So yes, you may have to make some sacrafices to live here, but most would say its worth it. Again, look at demographics for proof. We're growing. 

 

Yet this influx of the relatively-well-off creates problems for those who are not. Gentrification raises the cost of living for all, making it harder for people who are not earning as much -- if at all -- to survive. That, VG8, is why taxes are lower for the poor. We need to help them; it's what we do. 

 

Remind me how we got here? These are transit forums, right? 

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Remind me how you can tax the unemployed? Oh, right, you can't. They have no income. 

 

FWIW, while you're right, I'm probably not in your bracket (probably below), I do know a bit about taxes. Yes, they're high compared to, say, Oklahoma City, but look what we get for it. Transit. Schools. Water. Roads. Parks. Police. Fire. Social Services. Healthcare. Oklahoma City has only some of those. Yes, those services have problems, but everything does. That's what attracts people to New York, people like the very young professionals that you claim are suffering. They want to live somewhere vibrant, dynamic, and well amenitized. New York provides that. So yes, you may have to make some sacrafices to live here, but most would say its worth it. Again, look at demographics for proof. We're growing. 

 

Yet this influx of the relatively-well-off creates problems for those who are not. Gentrification raises the cost of living for all, making it harder for people who are not earning as much -- if at all -- to survive. That, VG8, is why taxes are lower for the poor. We need to help them; it's what we do. 

 

Remind me how we got here? These are transit forums, right? 

I posted those links with the intention of showing that we're losing our middle class here.  We're losing our native population. There's nothing good about that.  Yes, New York City's population is growing with more transplants coming in, but they're a different dynamic.  They either have mommy and daddy supporting them and/or they're sharing a place with three or four roommates, so it's not like a good portion of these people moving here are landing really high paying jobs, and those transplants usually go back home when things get tough.  That's another problem with the idea of helping the poor.  Nobody is helping the middle and upper middle class folks, and they're the ones paying the most in taxes which is why they're leaving.  The rich pay as well, but they usually find loopholes, so the question is who is going to pay for those people with a dwindling tax base?  Upstate NY is a mess right now with population losses.  Building affordable housing which is what you seem to hinting at isn't necessarily the solution either.  Westchester has fought that tooth and nail, and has done everything possible to put all of the housing in the poorest parts like Southwest Yonkers, while leaving Scarsdale, Bronxville, Irvington, Tarrytown, Croton-on-Hudson and other tony towns unscathed and increasingly tax burdened.  In order for the suburbs to have a chance I would say that there needs to be market-rate places built for the middle to upper middle class with tax incentives.

 

Oh, and the unemployed can collect unemployment, if they quality.  

[RR503]

No, loads of them are. Look at the growth in FIRE, tech, high value manufacturing. We are growing.

 

As for helping the almost-wealthy, I agree we need to keep them, but again, this is where the jobs and services are. They're staying. No pain no gain.

 

Also, I don't follow you're affordable housing thing. You're saying that they're burdened because they didn't take the development? Can you explain? Also, isn't tarrytown going to when they rebuild the GM site?

 

Finally, all this about tax cuts for the middle class is great, I'm with you there, but I don't agree with ones for UMC folks. That sounds like reheated trickle down economics.

 

Oh, and unemployment isn't income. It's a temporary stipend that can't be taxed.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

No, loads of them are. Look at the growth in FIRE, tech, high value manufacturing. We are growing.

 

As for helping the almost-wealthy, I agree we need to keep them, but again, this is where the jobs and services are. They're staying. No pain no gain.

 

Also, I don't follow you're affordable housing thing. You're saying that they're burdened because they didn't take the development? Can you explain? Also, isn't tarrytown going to when they rebuild the GM site?

 

Finally, all this about tax cuts for the middle class is great, I'm with you there, but I don't agree with ones for UMC folks. That sounds like reheated trickle down economics.

 

Oh, and unemployment isn't income. It's a temporary stipend that can't be taxed.

Loads of who are doing what?  Again, I didn't say that we aren't growing, but we are NOT keeping our native population.  They ARE leaving and being replaced by transplants who are a different dynamic.  There is nothing great about that because transplants are less likely to stay long term when things get rough.  When the economy tanks they're the first to go running back home.  Why shouldn't upper middle class professionals get a tax break? There's no trickle down economics going on.  New York has some of the highest taxes around and you need a tax base to sustain the sort of social programs that you're touting, otherwise those go bye-bye! 

 

Yes, unemployment is and should be temporary, assuming you qualify, since it isn't a given.

[RR503]

Loads of who are doing what?  Again, I didn't say that we aren't growing, but we are NOT keeping our native population.  They ARE leaving and being replaced by transplants who are a different dynamic.  There is nothing great about that because transplants are less likely to stay long term when things get rough.  When the economy tanks they're the first to go running back home.  Why shouldn't upper middle class professionals get a tax break? There's no trickle down economics going on.  New York has some of the highest taxes around and you need a tax base to sustain the sort of social programs that you're touting, otherwise those go bye-bye! 

 

Yes, unemployment is and should be temporary, assuming you qualify, since it isn't a given.

 

So you're scared of people who are not from NY? 

 

Many many many people who are well off and born in New York never leave. Despite your dire warnings, people come here and stay here simply because there is a thriving jobs market here. Once someone is settled in a way of life, they're loath to leave it -- that's how loyalty works. You'll notice that people who leave are largely older folks, who have no economic incentive to stay, and many environmental ones to leave. Also, what's this about transplants leaving? They took the initiative to come in the first place; they have more reason to stay. That's why immigrants pulled NY out of the slump in the '70s and '80s, they had so much skin in the game. 

 

So then we move on to this tax base thing. You claim that we're going to lose our tax base because we're taxing too much. But how do we benefit from this tax base if we're taxing too little? Food for thought, no?

 

I agree with you on unemployment, btw

[Via Garibaldi 8]

So you're scared of people who are not from NY? 

 

Many many many people who are well off and born in New York never leave. Despite your dire warnings, people come here and stay here simply because there is a thriving jobs market here. Once someone is settled in a way of life, they're loath to leave it -- that's how loyalty works. You'll notice that people who leave are largely older folks, who have no economic incentive to stay, and many environmental ones to leave. Also, what's this about transplants leaving? They took the initiative to come in the first place; they have more reason to stay. That's why immigrants pulled NY out of the slump in the '70s and '80s, they had so much skin in the game. 

 

So then we move on to this tax base thing. You claim that we're going to lose our tax base because we're taxing too much. But how do we benefit from this tax base if we're taxing too little? Food for thought, no?

 

I agree with you on unemployment, btw

Not at all.  I'm not talking about immigrants. They've always been coming here.  I'm talking about transplants from other states.  We never had this LARGE influx of them coming here before, and not all of them are coming because they're so skilled. It's more like they hate their boring little town and it's "hip" to come to NYC and try to make it, so now everyone is coming here.  Worse case scenario, they can just go back home and keep living with their parents.  Those are the people I'm talking about, not the white collar professional types moving here.

 

I don't claim it.  We ARE losing our middle class.  That's just a fact.  The gap between classes here continues to widen.  The whole tax code needs to be reworked so that everyone pays their fair share, and overtaxing the middle class is not the answer. The poor and the rich need to pay up as well.

 

More importantly, there is too much focus on the poor.  What exactly are they contributing? They don't pay much in taxes, yet they receive the most benefits!  The building of housing is for who these days? The poor? It's crazy.  We have to protect our young professionals.  It's becoming more and more difficult to survive for young middle class people. These days you need to earn 70 - 80k if you're living alone, and even that may not be enough when you look at how much is paid in taxes. My girlfriend's sister makes around 60k a year and she had to move to a small studio in the outer boroughs because there was nothing she could afford in Manhattan, and that doesn't even include what her boyfriend makes.  This is a young person with a small child that is basically just starting out on her own.

[RR503]

Not at all.  I'm not talking about immigrants. They've always been coming here.  I'm talking about transplants from other states.  We never had this LARGE influx of them coming here before, and not all of them are coming because they're so skilled. It's more like they hate their boring little town and it's "hip" to come to NYC and try to make it, so now everyone is coming here.  Worse case scenario, they can just go back home and keep living with their parents.  Those are the people I'm talking about, not the white collar professional types moving here.

 

I don't claim it.  We ARE losing our middle class.  That's just a fact.  The gap between classes here continues to widen.  The whole tax code needs to be reworked so that everyone pays their fair share, and overtaxing the middle class is not the answer. The poor and the rich need to pay up as well.

 

More importantly, there is too much focus on the poor.  What exactly are they contributing? They don't pay much in taxes, yet they receive the most benefits!  The building of housing is for who these days? The poor? It's crazy.  We have to protect our young professionals.  It's becoming more and more difficult to survive for young middle class people. These days you need to earn 70 - 80k if you're living alone, and even that may not be enough when you look at how much is paid in taxes. My girlfriend's sister makes around 60k a year and she had to move to a small studio in the outer boroughs because there was nothing she could afford in Manhattan, and that doesn't even include what her boyfriend makes.  This is a young person with a small child that is basically just starting out on her own.

Yeah, so what? While they're here, they buy our goods, work, pay taxes, etc. I know that decades of hearing about makers and takers has made you cynical af, but you've got to see the other side. These people are CONTRIBUTING. 

 

Yes, we are losing our middle class. You know why? Because your republican idols are hell bent on lowering taxes for the rich, breaking the backs of unions, destroying the social safety net and raising taxes on the middle class. Do you know how many times they've tried to get rid of the EITC? That is why. Right now, we aren't overtaxing the middle class. In fact, we aren't taxing anyone. Tax rates are near historic lows, and with the fact that many congresscritters have seizures at the mention of a tax increase, that isn't going to end soon.

 

Finally, this whole thing about the poor sitting complacently while all the handouts flow in is nothing more than a conservative wet dream. These people are working two, maybe three jobs at a time, and still not getting by. Then people like you want to raise taxes on them and get rid of the things that allow them to survive because they are 'takers.' To be honest, it pisses me off. Not just the suggetsions, but the elitist ignorance that lies behind it. You ask about their contributions to society? Well next time a pizza gets delivered, ask the guy holding it what he's bringing to the table. At the very least your pizza, no? I agree we need to be doing more for young professionals, but lowering their taxes is unhelpful. According to the rabidly conservative think tank AEI, middle class folks pay LESS THAN 15% of their income in taxes. Yes, this varies by region, but not significantly enough to give it the top spot -- one occupied by either housing or transportation. THAT, VG8, is where we need to help NYers save, by giving them affordable housing and affordable transportation. And if you have your way, we'd have either. 

 

Can we move on? I feel this is getting circular. 

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Yeah, so what? While they're here, they buy our goods, work, pay taxes, etc. I know that decades of hearing about makers and takers has made you cynical af, but you've got to see the other side. These people are CONTRIBUTING. 

 

Yes, we are losing our middle class. You know why? Because your republican idols are hell bent on lowering taxes for the rich, breaking the backs of unions, destroying the social safety net and raising taxes on the middle class. Do you know how many times they've tried to get rid of the EITC? That is why. Right now, we aren't overtaxing the middle class. In fact, we aren't taxing anyone. Tax rates are near historic lows, and with the fact that many congresscritters have seizures at the mention of a tax increase, that isn't going to end soon.

 

Finally, this whole thing about the poor sitting complacently while all the handouts flow in is nothing more than a conservative wet dream. These people are working two, maybe three jobs at a time, and still not getting by. Then people like you want to raise taxes on them and get rid of the things that allow them to survive because they are 'takers.' To be honest, it pisses me off. Not just the suggetsions, but the elitist ignorance that lies behind it. You ask about their contributions to society? Well next time a pizza gets delivered, ask the guy holding it what he's bringing to the table. At the very least your pizza, no? I agree we need to be doing more for young professionals, but lowering their taxes is unhelpful. According to the rabidly conservative think tank AEI, middle class folks pay LESS THAN 15% of their income in taxes. Yes, this varies by region, but not significantly enough to give it the top spot -- one occupied by either housing or transportation. THAT, VG8, is where we need to help NYers save, by giving them affordable housing and affordable transportation. And if you have your way, we'd have either. 

 

Can we move on? I feel this is getting circular. 

We probably should because we clearly have different points of view on this topic.   I do think that there's no question though that long term, suburban areas will have to look at running better service to attract young middle class professionals.  I actually wrote to Metro-North asking for additional semi-express service for Riverdale because it has been a huge success.  

[RR503]

We probably should because we clearly have different points of view on this topic.   I do think that there's no question though that long term, suburban areas will have to look at running better service to attract young middle class professionals.  I actually wrote to Metro-North asking for additional semi-express service for Riverdale because it has been a huge success.

 

And I would be all for that.

 

Thanks for the debate!