Skip to main content

The Holes In Connecticut’s Revenue Bucket


We all know that when the price of a taxed product or service drops, tax revenue also decreases. The severe cut in the price of gas, for instance, cannot help but affect Connecticut’s already stratospheric gas tax revenue.  When the price of gas at the pump was hovering around $4 per gallon, state government was reaping far more in revenue than is presently the case, after the price of gas at my nearest pump has plummeted to $2.30 per gallon.

When people move from cancer causing highly taxed cigarettes to more healthy untaxed e-cigs, one may expect tax revenue to decrease proportionally; though, in this regard, one must never underestimate the steely resolve of consumer protection senators such as Dick Blumenthal, tireless in his pursuit of new products that might be taxed or companies that might be sued. The perfect progressive, Mr. Blumenthal, it should be noted, is interested in reforming everything BUT government.


Retirees are taxable products with wings on their ankles and brains in their brain pans. Tax then exorbitantly, and they move – many times to Florida or Texas where “seldom is heard a discouraging word, and the skies are not cloudy all day.”

Recent estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau indicated that Connecticut residents know which side their bread is buttered on. According to the current  Census Bureau report,  nearly 26,000 more people moved out of Connecticut than was the case between July 2012 and July 2013. The increase represents Connecticut’s first population drop since 2008 and the third-largest percentage population decrease of any state save West Virginia and Illinois.

One does not have to be Governor Malloy or President Pro Tem of the Senate Martin Looney or Speaker of the House Brendan Sharkey to reach the inevitable conclusion arising from such calculations:  Fewer people, less revenue.

Here are some other figures reported in the census:

*Younger people are moving to high density large cities such as Washington, New York and San Francisco, no doubt carrying with them their very expensive sheepskins from Connecticut colleges. The out-migration of the young is devastating to a state simply because the receiving state will reap taxes for the number of working years that young immigrants, had the exodus not occurred, would have remained in Connecticut; the younger the migrant, the greater the loss in net tax revenue.

*Connecticut’s out-migration is mitigated somewhat by an increase in immigration, but there is a hitch. In 2013-2014, Connecticut’s immigration nearly doubled from 2011; but there has been a demographic change in migrants from US to foreign born immigrants. “We are rapidly seeing this demographic change to the more diverse,” said economist Ron Van Winkle. Mr. Van Winkle, West Hartford’s town manager, noted “Even in West Hartford, the number of people that are foreign-born has been increasing substantially.

*The “natural increase” in population, the number of births minus deaths, is tending downward, Mr. Winkle says, largely because marriages are being postponed to a later age, and women are deciding “not to have babies as they grow older.” The “natural increase” number is still positive in Connecticut but decreasing substantially. There were 9,075 more births than deaths in 2011, a number that dropped last year to 6,900.


And then there is the double whammy. The number of baby-boomer retirees will increase sharply in coming years, but they may not be spending their retiring years in Connecticut. A state employee drawing on the public purse for retirement benefits depletes state revenue – and, assuming a move out of state, both his salary and benefit portfolio will enrich the state to which he has moved. Retirees whose incomes are static are moving to states in which taxes and the cost of living – mortgages, rents, food and amenities-- are lower. 

Mr. Van Winkle’s conclusions are not such as would send a tingle up the leg of Mr. Malloy or the Democratic majority in the General Assembly:

 “We’re going to see some sizable issues on these population fronts, with people retiring and moving, and young people choosing other places because job creation isn’t what it should be. It’s a relatively quiet economy, and that won’t generate what our leaders are hoping for.

“Companies are growing where they can find people and skilled labor, and even though Connecticut’s labor force is highly skilled, it’s not growing at a rapid rate. So … it doesn’t bode well. … It’s not that we’re moribund. It’s just a slower growth area.”

It’s not cancer, but you’re going to die anyway, unless you a) cut spending, b) reduce regulations, c) wake up and smell the festering lilies. 





Comments

peter brush said…
“Even in West Hartford, the number of people that are foreign-born has been increasing substantially.
----------------
Which is to say that foreign immigration to Ct. mitigates somewhat the ongoing loss of Native Nutmeggers,but , that mitigation comes at a cost, or costs plural.
F.A.I.R. calculates the net loss in 2010 to the State's (including muni) fisc due to illegal immigration alone at $970 million. What does the legislature think about this phenomenon? No, problem; let's make Ct. a sanctuary state, give driver licenses to illegals. Not that legal immigration is without costs. Legal immigrants are more likely to be poor, and therefor a burden on the fisc, than are Connecticut aborigines.
----------
Poverty: Connecticut's immigrants are more likely to be poor than their native-born counterparts. In 2007, 8.8 percent of foreign-born households were below the poverty line, compared to 7.8 percent of native households. An additional 7.9 percent of the foreign-born and 5.0 percent of native households were not in poverty but had incomes less than 1.5 times the poverty level.18 15.5 percent of children in immigrant families were poor in 2006, compared to 9.9 percent of native children.
http://www.fairus.org/states/Connecticut
---------
The Connecticut DMV has started a Drive Only program for undocumented individuals who are 16 and older and cannot establish their legal presence in the United States or may not have a Social Security number. The process involves applying for a learner's permit that can then lead to a drive-only license.
mccommas said…
Connecticut has a highly skilled labor force alright. And a lot of them are working in warehouses, not office buildings.
peter brush said…
Mr. Blumenthal, it should be noted, is interested in reforming everything BUT government.
---------------
It is amazing to me that his political image never seemed to suffer from his standing up for segregated schools all those years. To his credit, he did come out for criminal investigations at the VA. About which, two questions: If there's so much crime in the government program couldn't we think about getting rid of it, give vets insurance vouchers? And, can we please have a special prosecutor to look into the criminal abuse of innocent citizens by the Internal Revenue Machine?
----------------
“It doesn't make any difference that he (President Obama) just heard about Phoenix in April, we’ve known for years that the VA backlog was enormous,” he said.

Blumenthal said there is “credible” evidence of “criminal wrongdoing” in over 30 VA facilities, and the inspector general doesn’t have enough resources to fully investigate it all.

“We're talking now about evidence, credible and specific evidence of criminal wrongdoing across the country in more than thirty places. The inspector general of the Veterans Administration has only a hundred and sixty-five investigators,” Blumenthal said. “Plainly more resources are needed.http://projects.ctmirror.org/fairfielded/index.php/big-influx-non-english-speakers-challenges-educational-system

Popular posts from this blog

The Blumenthal Burisma Connection

Steve Hilton , a Fox News commentator who over the weekend had connected some Burisma corruption dots, had this to say about Connecticut U.S. Senator Dick Blumenthal’s association with the tangled knot of corruption in Ukraine: “We cross-referenced the Senate co-sponsors of Ed Markey's Ukraine gas bill with the list of Democrats whom Burisma lobbyist, David Leiter, routinely gave money to and found another one -- one of the most sanctimonious of them all, actually -- Sen. Richard Blumenthal."

Powell, the JI, And Economic literacy

Powell, Pesci Substack The Journal Inquirer (JI), one of the last independent newspapers in Connecticut, is now a part of the Hearst Media chain. Hearst has been growing by leaps and bounds in the state during the last decade. At the same time, many newspapers in Connecticut have shrunk in size, the result, some people seem to think, of ad revenue smaller newspapers have lost to internet sites and a declining newspaper reading public. Surviving papers are now seeking to recover the lost revenue by erecting “pay walls.” Like most besieged businesses, newspapers also are attempting to recoup lost revenue through staff reductions, reductions in the size of the product – both candy bars and newspapers are much smaller than they had been in the past – and sell-offs to larger chains that operate according to the social Darwinian principles of monopolistic “red in tooth and claw” giant corporations. The first principle of the successful mega-firm is: Buy out your predator before he swallows

Down The Rabbit Hole, A Book Review

Down the Rabbit Hole How the Culture of Corrections Encourages Crime by Brent McCall & Michael Liebowitz Available at Amazon Price: $12.95/softcover, 337 pages   “ Down the Rabbit Hole: How the Culture of Corrections Encourages Crime ,” a penological eye-opener, is written by two Connecticut prisoners, Brent McCall and Michael Liebowitz. Their book is an analytical work, not merely a page-turner prison drama, and it provides serious answers to the question: Why is reoffending a more likely outcome than rehabilitation in the wake of a prison sentence? The multiple answers to this central question are not at all obvious. Before picking up the book, the reader would be well advised to shed his preconceptions and also slough off the highly misleading claims of prison officials concerning the efficacy of programs developed by dusty old experts who have never had an honest discussion with a real convict. Some of the experts are more convincing cons than the cons, p