Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

thecentury t1_j7zeqj8 wrote

Reply to comment by dust1990 in NYC will have $4.9B budget surplus for 2023, watchdog says by mowotlarx

Sorry, but that word doesn't exist in the blue democratic state of NY.

−5

dust1990 t1_j7zqt9q wrote

So asinine. New York City is one of the few places where the Laffer Curve would hold true because a lot of wealthy people want to live here. If the tax rates were more reasonable and competitive with other states (NJ, CT, MA), they would most definitely increase tax revenue to pay for services for everyone.

0

dust1990 t1_j80aoes wrote

If you downvoted this, I guess you don't like services and enjoy paying high rates.

2

Medianmodeactivate t1_j84g13r wrote

Other way around. The leverage that NYC has means they can probably net afford to increase rates. That's why the city is able to pull off a municipal income tax.

1

dust1990 t1_j85jcsc wrote

My point is that lower rates are the revenue maximizing equilibrium. Don’t abolish it, but lower it such that more wealthy people become residents which is good for everyone because it increases tax revenue for services.

1

Medianmodeactivate t1_j85o3kd wrote

>My point is that lower rates are the revenue maximizing equilibrium. Don’t abolish it, but lower it such that more wealthy people become residents which is good for everyone because it increases tax revenue for services.

Right and I'm saying the net effect is ambiguous. It's not clear that the equilibrium lower taxes. For all we know they could very well afford to increase certain taxes and increase net revenues even if some number of people relocate. Since wealthy people want to live here to some extent they are a captive audience.

1

dust1990 t1_j85q5n5 wrote

It’s no secret the city is bleeding HNW and UHNW residents. Why not test it out?

1