Anyone wants to move from Massachusetts to Nebraska?

<p>

Yes, to some of us that would be a horror. I’m the first to admit I want to live in a diverse area. I hate living in a state where my best friend can’t get married and I loathe the idea of moving to yet another state with similar conservative qualities. I’d pick a state with liberal state laws and much higher taxes over a conservative state with lower taxes any day. Given the choice between personal freedoms and a fatter pocketbook, well you can guess which one I’d pick. Different people have different priorities and that’s perfectly fine.</p>

<p>I’ve never been to either place so I can’t judge lol.</p>

<p>I loathe the idea of people using skin color as a pejorative.</p>

<br>

<br>

<p>That’s a misleading title.</p>

<p>Their actual quote from research is:</p>

<p>“Analysis of six decades of data found that top tax rates “have had little association with saving, investment, or productivity growth.””</p>

<p>The US Economy doesn’t operate in a vacuum either. I saw no control for lower tax rates and costs in other countries sucking economic growth from the United States. The article is fairly useless for analysis if you don’t take external competition into account.</p>

<p>On the other hand, we’ve seen strong economic growth in Singapore, Thailand, China, Vietnam, South Korea and Taiwan. What could have caused that?</p>

<br>

<br>

<p>That sounds very nice.</p>

<p>BCEagle91, you didn’t read the report. :)</p>

<p>Sounds like he did.</p>

<br>

<br>

<p>If I didn’t read it and you did, then you could point out where my statement is incorrect. But you didn’t do that. So I could assume that my statement is correct.</p>

<p>However, I did just read it and it doesn’t account for foreign competition so my original statement is correct.</p>

<p>Anything else?</p>

<p>Yes, other countries have lower costs than the United States. There’s a reason for that: lower standards and no concern for externalities.</p>

<p>If you want to get paid ten dollars a day and breathe the worst-polluted air ever measured, you’re welcome to move to China if you like. The rest of us rather like a decent minimum wage and the Clean Air Act, thank you very much.</p>

<p>Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell. -Edward Abbey</p>

<p>BCEagle91, I was correct when I wrote you didn’t read it. Yet, you commented on the report like you did read the report. That is what I find interesting. :)</p>

<br>

<br>

<p>The argument on other countries competing with the US is that competition exists. Not that those countries would be a more attractive place to live. Of course there might be areas of China that are more attractive to live in than some places in the United States.</p>

<p>I do know people that moved to the US from India and China and moved back to their home countries for better job opportunities.</p>

<br>

<br>

<p>You are incorrect. I commented on the article:</p>

<br>

<br>

<p>I expected you to comment if the research did take that into account.</p>

<p>That’s optimistic dynamic optimization.</p>

<p>A coworker wrote a paper (and implemented it) on that back in the 1980s in the context of query optimization in relational databases.</p>

<p>If you read the report why did you write what you wrote? Foreign competition may be a reason why the relationship between tax rates and gdp has the relationship it has, but the report does talk about the relationship between tax rates and real gdp growth.</p>

<p>You don’t have to answer the question. I don’t care. And don’t assume I agree or disagree with what you write. I don’t have the time or inclination to comment on everything you write.</p>

<p>

OK, and? So what? Nobody denies that it exists. And yet California, the b</p>

<br>

<br>

<p>I read the report after you said that I didn’t read the report. You would have to provide quotations if you want me to answer this question because I don’t know which of what I wrote you are now referring to.</p>

<br>

<br>

<p>Well, you could have made arguments for your case instead of trying to zing me.</p>

<p>I often leave deliberate traps or apparent openings - goes back to my chess days.</p>

<br>

<br>

<p>It’s hardly irrelevant. You are arguing that other countries have lower costs and so, presumably, we should lower costs to be more “competitive” with them. I am pointing out the reasons why those countries have lower costs.</p>

<p>“I loathe the idea of people using skin color as a pejorative”</p>

<p>Which is why I prefer to live in a DIVERSE area :wink: Meaning people of many colors, not just one. Many cultures, not just one. Many religions (or NO religions) and not just one way to worship, or not. Many cuisines, and not just European-based.</p>

<br>

<br>

<p>Yes.</p>

<br>

<br>

<p>No. Please try to follow the discussion.</p>

<p>If you think that I am arguing this, please quote where I stated this.</p>

<br>

<br>

<p>Irrelevant.</p>

<p>Why do threads like this become a rehash of political perspectives? It’s disheartening. </p>

<p>The number of glib responses restates the obvious: that no one listens, just talks.</p>

<p>I have to stop even reading threads like this because attempts to contribute facts are merely excuses for people to show they have no interest in discussing facts but instead in saying what they believe. </p>

<p>Really. Why the heck do any of you care where a person chooses to live? Surely people have their reasons for their choices. I can point to a new paper that says, for example, that people move to high cost locations because those provide a level of “amenities” - which is a defined term that includes a lott - AND the growth in those amenities has exceeded what the rather complicated mathematical model says should happen if life were as simple as we might imagine. The implication, to be clear, is that people make choices, yes personal choices, that we can examine in the aggregate but which don’t matter at all when it comes to your personal choice and, guess what, many of those choices may surprise you or me or even all of us. </p>

<p>But I would bet $1000 that no one would read that paper. Or that no one would read the paper - dismissed out of hand - by the Boston Fed that looks at different social spending rates in New England. Why? Because people would rather say what they want to believe and because actual research takes time and requires an open mind.</p>

<p>In another thread, I saw a person ask about a throat spray which claims to be effective “medicine”. In less than 5 minutes, I found out it is your basic advertising lie; the product is nothing but the same stuff you find in any mouthwash and can be sold because it is listed as safe by the FDA. The marketers slide past the truth that it is useful in small but meaningful ways against basic bacterial infections like gingivitis but that it does nothing about viruses. Anyone take the time to research things rather than repeat what websites say? </p>

<p>Anyone tell you that Hitler confiscated guns? It’s a total lie, one btw that the Aryan Nation, not a friend to Jews, has been getting right for decades (because they refer to Weimar, which had very strict gun regulation, as “Jewish” because some Jews were involved). But you’ll hear it and many will repeat it. I saw in the last gun thread a reference to a very large number of gun uses to protect individuals and checked the source only to discover - duh - that it was a complete distortion of a paper that actually said essentially the opposite. Anyone bother to check sources?</p>

<p>In my marriage, I try to remember my wife doesn’t need to hear every day the same exact things. I try to find new things to talk about and ways to surprise her. I vary things. Why? Here’s a great life lesson: I had 2 cats who were brothers and they fought every day. Over 12 years they worked on moves, changing them, trying to take the other by surprise. They could fight because they trusted the other would never cause actual harm. They worked at their moves and that worked on their relationship. Even when one was near death, he used his light weight to spring a new move on his brother by leaping into his face and winning that round. </p>

<p>We all need a cat to fight with. But that requires work. Instead we say a bunch of stuff over and over and over without variation. These conversations are not as advanced as 2 cats fighting because the cats actually work at finding something new to say. Just repeating your beliefs is like being a lazy cat who does the same fighting move each time.</p>

<p>At its best the internet is a place where cats can fight because no one can actually be harmed. But we demonstrate daily that cats get life more than people do. They try. We just talk, talk, talk because the only effort we want to make is to repeat what we believe.</p>

<p>BCEagle91, please don’t leave traps. If you want to joke around that’s fine. I like to read your posts. You are a smart, interesting guy, but if you are going to comment on things you don’t read, or if you are going to say I am wrong when you know I am not, I am going to lose interest.</p>

<p>Lergnom is obviously extremely bright. I would like him to stay and share his thoughts, opinions, and to bring up facts.</p>

<p>But, I can see Lergnom leaving.</p>

<p>Some posts are ridiculous. There is no intelligence behind them. The
posts are interesting on a psychological basis, and I love psychology, but that gets old.</p>

<p>Lergnom, I love your posts. I know it gets frustrating. I love kluge’s and Hanna’s, and musicprnt’s too. There is so much intelligence in all four of your posts.</p>

<p>“I loathe the idea of people using skin color as a pejorative.”</p>

<p>“White” wasn’t the pejorative. “Overwhelmingly” was the pejorative.</p>