Governor Malloy Won't Push For Costly XL Center Upgrades

[Exit 4]

Connecticut's simple problem with taxes is that the state sends a ton more to the federal government than it gets back. Southern states get massive subsidies from the federal government that they use to hand out as tax breaks to lure businesses from wealthy northern states. Until Connecticut solves that problem, we will be at a competitive disadvantage to virtually every other state in the country.

Ironically, many of the same idiots in this thread blasting Malloy for not giving more handouts are the same ones that denounce welfare. Republicans are consistently hypocritical, if nothing else.

You obviously didn't check this link which has more recent data. CT has historically been a large net loser on federal tax contributions, per data sets from the 2000s, however the latest data shows more balance.
http://www.theatlantic.com/business...tates-are-givers-and-which-are-takers/361668/

Anyway, the bottomline is either our two senators should spend less time worrying about product recalls and photo ops for green energy and more time returning our federal tax dollars to help us refloat the ship. And we need to spend those dollars wisely with maximum value.

 

[CallMeBruce]

Do people really think that GE left CT for the tax-free haven that is Boston, MA?

 

[Exit 4]

I love the publications cited too: WSJ, Bloomberg, and the NY Sun... real diverse thinking there. How many more pages before someone mentions the gold standard?

Bloomberg is center left, The Atlantic Monthly is way left. None of your commentary addresses the issues. The head in the sand approach over the past 15 years has brought us to this point of reckoning (chronic budget deficits, home values still below peak, post recession employment recovery near dead last in the nation). Ideas welcome - from all parties.

 

[Exit 4]

Do people really think that GE left CT for the tax-free haven that is Boston, MA?

They left because the state hasn't properly dealt with its structural budget deficit. It was as much about the potential for much more taxes tomorrow than about taxes today. We have a state budget much closer to Puerto Rico and Detroit than MA. GE made this abundantly clear in an unprecedented manner for a public company.

 

[JSM1970]

A couple things

1) across the board reductions in state workers by 10% (to start)
2) reduction in retiree pensions by 10%
3) consolidation of redundant local services at the regional and county levels, drive substantial economies of scale
4) substantial business credits and incentives to attract companies, like MA did to GE
5) scale back some of the transpiration and make better investments. Letting state workers do any of the work is a waste, drags on, costly, disruption to local communities

Just a few quick ideas. Would save billions of more. I would honestly go deeper on #1-2

Bloomberg is center left, The Atlantic Monthly is way left. None of your commentary addresses the issues. The head in the sand approach over the past 15 years has brought us to this point of reckoning (chronic budget deficits, home values still below peak, post recession employment recovery near dead last in the nation). Ideas welcome - from all parties.

 

[IMind]

Bloomberg is center left, The Atlantic Monthly is way left. None of your commentary addresses the issues. The head in the sand approach over the past 15 years has brought us to this point of reckoning (chronic budget deficits, home values still below peak, post recession employment recovery near dead last in the nation). Ideas welcome - from all parties.

Oh wont someone please think of the Children!

Listen you two can go back to the cesspool.. seriously... we're not that interested... you're probably not really interested in my solution to the problem either.

 

[mavblues]

Do people really think that GE left CT for the tax-free haven that is Boston, MA?

You mean like the Patriots did?

 

[Drew]

You mean like the Patriots did?

Well played

 

[JSM1970]

Patriots were never there, they didn't have 800 employees who owned houses, paid local and state sales, etc.

Well played

 

[Exit 4]

You mean like the Patriots did?

If you watch how corporations jostle for benefit packages, the quotes put out by GE management were unprecedented. They made statements expressing concern about state policies on a broad scale and the state's financial health. Very unusual and really just unheard of.

 

[Adios]

If you don't want growth in numbers of people, you should still care about what kind of people you have. Losing high income earners and gaining welfare recipients would make the state's environment less desirable for those who remain.

As for density, well, Connecticut is less dense than Rhode Island or Massachusetts (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_population_density). It could grow in population density a bit and still be a very nice place to live. I like Massachusetts better than Connecticut, it's not bad having a densely populated city around as long as you can escape it, which you can in Boston.

The Connecticut colony should have included Springfield.

The traffic in the Boston area is too much. Now I understand why Bostonian drivers are reckless. Boston is a major city. Connecticut never had a city that truly rivaled Boston. New Haven and Hartford are the closest we came, with Hartford being the richest city in the country between the Civil War and the Great Depression. That Colt building made Hartford very wealthy. But Connecticut cities definitely have lots of architecture that represents wealth from the 1800s and 1700s and even 1600s. Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Virginia were the beginning of the English colonies here.

Connecticut has a future in tourism. Boston bay area can only handle so much.

 

[Adios]

Yes, pretty much by yourself and soon to East Hartford.

#progress

The greater Hartford area is going to have bus rides to UConn games.

#progress

Is there some bus line we can create along the coast for trips to games at Yale?

 

[CL82]

The state sends no money, the citizens do. It's not CT's money.

What are you talking about? That has zero to do with the bloated and inefficient state and local workers, with rich benefits.

Thank you. It really didn't seem worth bother to point that out.

 

[CL82]

The Connecticut colony should have included Springfield.

The traffic in the Boston area is too much. Now I understand why Bostonian drivers are reckless. Boston is a major city. Connecticut never had a city that truly rivaled Boston. New Haven and Hartford are the closest we came, with Hartford being the richest city in the country between the Civil War and the Great Depression. That Colt building made Hartford very wealthy. But Connecticut cities definitely have lots of architecture that represents wealth from the 1800s and 1700s and even 1600s. Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Virginia were the beginning of the English colonies here.

Connecticut has a future in tourism. Boston bay area can only handle so much.

New London was a decent sized city back in the day, George Washington's day.

 

[brasssbonanzaa]

Connecticut has a future in tourism. Boston bay area can only handle so much.

What reason do people have to "tour" in CT? The outside-of-Boston tourist options in New England are pretty much a stronghold of Newport and Downeast Maine in the warm weather and VT/NH/ME ski resorts in the winter. Not sure where CT is shifting into this with some gold mine vacation destination.

 

[MASSconn]

The Connecticut colony should have included Springfield.

The traffic in the Boston area is too much. Now I understand why Bostonian drivers are reckless. Boston is a major city. Connecticut never had a city that truly rivaled Boston. New Haven and Hartford are the closest we came, with Hartford being the richest city in the country between the Civil War and the Great Depression. That Colt building made Hartford very wealthy. But Connecticut cities definitely have lots of architecture that represents wealth from the 1800s and 1700s and even 1600s. Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Virginia were the beginning of the English colonies here.

Connecticut has a future in tourism. Boston bay area can only handle so much.

Boston has about 7 Manhattanesque luxury apartment skyscrapers going up in the next 5-10 years, multiple office towers, an innovation hub in the Seaport, expansion of 95 and tech companies flocking into here. Plus our colleges are going nowhere, MIT just won the Hyperloop competition. I would say the tourism future is looking better than Hartford/New Haven right now.

I am by no means anti-Hartford, New Haven, Stamford. But, they need massive overhauling of masterplans. Especially Hartford. It's not looking too good right now.

 

[pj]

What reason do people have to "tour" in CT? The outside-of-Boston tourist options in New England are pretty much a stronghold of Newport and Downeast Maine in the warm weather and VT/NH/ME ski resorts in the winter. Not sure where CT is shifting into this with some gold mine vacation destination.

You underestimate the attraction of traffic jams.

 

[brasssbonanzaa]

You underestimate the attraction of traffic jams.

You underestimate how many traffic jams there are on the Pike/95/93

 

[JSM1970]

95 between the Bridgeport and Greenwich is worse than DC, Atlanta or LA

You underestimate how many traffic jams there are on the Pike/95/93

 

[FDNY99]

Boston has about 7 Manhattanesque luxury apartment skyscrapers going up in the next 5-10 years, multiple office towers, an innovation hub in the Seaport, expansion of 95 and tech companies flocking into here. Plus our colleges are going nowhere, MIT just won the Hyperloop competition. I would say the tourism future is looking better than Hartford/New Haven right now.

I am by no means anti-Hartford, New Haven, Stamford. But, they need massive overhauling of masterplans. Especially Hartford. It's not looking too good right now.

7 "Manhattanesque" residential high-rises aren't that much in the scheme of things....and by "Manhattanesque" how tall are they? They don't mean much unless they are condo's or co-op's. The rents will end up killing those things. The 40 story high luxury residential building in Manhattan is going by the way of the stone age...60 story is the new norm...and there are at least 10 projects started or will be starting soon that will be 80+.

 

[ct06111]

http://ctfastrak.com/about/expansion-study

Meeting @ UConn student union tmrw 2/3/16 11-1pm

http://today.uconn.edu/2016/01/ctfastrak/

Expansion concepts here: I like concept 1B
http://ctfastrak.com/files/2016_1_19_Service_Concepts_2016_Accessible.pdf

Option to take a bus from my house to electric blue and UConn? Sign me up

 

[CL82]

What reason do people have to "tour" in CT? The outside-of-Boston tourist options in New England are pretty much a stronghold of Newport and Downeast Maine in the warm weather and VT/NH/ME ski resorts in the winter. Not sure where CT is shifting into this with some gold mine vacation destination.

Linky

 

[FartMan69]

This thread had train wreck written all over it from the start. I'm sure all of these politically driven rants are well thought out and justifiable but the fact is we will still have to watch games in a glorified Soviet bunker that smells like the back room of a Panda Express.

 

[NYUConn]

 

[auggie22]

7 "Manhattanesque" residential high-rises aren't that much in the scheme of things....and by "Manhattanesque" how tall are they? They don't mean much unless they are condo's or co-op's. The rents will end up killing those things. The 40 story high luxury residential building in Manhattan is going by the way of the stone age...60 story is the new norm...and there are at least 10 projects started or will be starting soon that will be 80+.

At one point in the last ten years I read that there are over 90 buildings in NYC that are taller than the tallest building in Boston ( the Pru ). Boston is a relatively small city, both vertically and by land area.