leetnewb2 t1_j4zhncz wrote
Reply to comment by Mysticpoisen in If Governor Murphy is serious about equity in this state, he should push for improving public libraries. by Flashinglights0101
Is that really the case in NJ?
Mysticpoisen t1_j4zjh2w wrote
Suburbs going out of their way to vote against the interests of the cities, or the cities subsidizing suburban living?
Either way, yes.
leetnewb2 t1_j4zjm9m wrote
I'll ask a different way. What cities in NJ are subsidizing NJ suburbs?
Mysticpoisen t1_j4zk86b wrote
All of them, fundamentally. Cities produce dramatically more taxes, but an outsized portion of their state taxes go towards suburban infrastructure. Suburbs would be exponentially more expensive to develop and live in if not for the insane tax revenues from cities to pave the way. This is how state taxes work. Urban areas are and always have been the economic engine of any state.
leetnewb2 t1_j4zklpe wrote
While I acknowledge that generally holds true, I don't think that dynamic is as clean as you claim it to be in NJ.
Mysticpoisen t1_j4zkx4d wrote
Anything at all that would make you think that? Are the suburbs of NJ suddenly massive financial or industrial centers? Did their infrastructure suddenly become an order of magnitude cheaper? NJ is the most heavily urbanized state in the country with the highest infrastructure costs, the dynamic holds more true here than anywhere else.
leetnewb2 t1_j4zlx8a wrote
NJ, and by virtue its suburbs, subsidize NYS and NYC primarily through tax dynamics. Also, North NJ's population density exceeds most cities in the country, so it isn't clear to me why the suburban/urban labels are even consistent in comparison. NJ's high infrastructure costs (roads in particular) are probably driven more by the population density, hostile seasons, and the heavy truck/freight traffic as the link between the massive container terminals in NYC/North NJ and the rest of the country.
Mysticpoisen t1_j4znkan wrote
The labels are relevant because suburban areas are bedroom communities without industry of any kind(and we're not just talking about north jersey), which is why they languish in terms of tax revenue. And the tax dynamics with NYC are complex, but still generate significant revenue for the state, but it's irrelevant to the conversation because we're talking about NJ cities.
While the population density of NJ is quite high, it's because our cities are some of the densest in the world. AND they have significant industry of all kinds, making them produce tax revenue orders of magnitude higher than suburban areas.
leetnewb2 t1_j4zorbh wrote
> The labels are relevant because suburban areas are bedroom communities without industry of any kind(and we're not just talking about north jersey), which is why they languish in terms of tax revenue.
That makes less sense in the emerging era of remote work. And it doesn't make much sense to talk about South Jersey when the bulk of the state population is in Central and North.
> And the tax dynamics with NYC are complex, but still generate significant revenue for the state, but it's irrelevant to the conversation because we're talking about NJ cities.
NJ commuters to NYC pay income taxes to NYS. How does that generate significant revenue for NJ? It is relevant to the discussion because such a significant chunk of income to the residents of NJ is generated in NYS and does not result in state taxes paid to NJ. You could argue that NJ suburbs are dependent on NYC for income.
> While the population density of NJ is quite high, it's because our cities are some of the densest in the world. AND they have significant industry of all kinds, making them produce tax revenue orders of magnitude higher than suburban areas.
The population density of NJ is high because Manhattan and the boroughs are extremely dense. And I'll repeat - in the era of remote work and substantial digital work, the concept of urban areas being the drivers of state revenue and productivity gets a little weaker.
Mysticpoisen t1_j4zrx3b wrote
NY and NJ have tax revenue sharing systems in place for residents of one who work in the other. The fact that you didn't know that, or understand that income tax is trivial compared to property and corporate and industry make it clear you don't have any idea how the state budget operates.
leetnewb2 t1_j4zu928 wrote
> NY and NJ have tax revenue sharing systems in place for residents of one who work in the other.
That is incorrect. I am a NJ resident that works in NYC. I file taxes in both states and take a credit from NJ for taxes paid to NYS, which effectively nullify any individual income tax contribution to NJ. NJ collects no income tax from me while subsidizing services to me. It is a huge part of NJ's funding gap.
> The fact that you didn't know that, or understand that income tax is trivial compared to property and corporate and industry make it clear you don't have any idea how the state budget operates.
Please cite literally anything that supports your position.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments