In Greenwich and Manhattan, Tax-Hike Fears Fuel Talk of Exodus

The poor, wealthy babies --- and all Democrats too. I feel terrible for them. (*Eye-roll*)

At Bloomberg, "Tax-Hike Fears Trigger Talk of Exodus From Manhattan and Greenwich":

Fears of a tax hike are fueling talk of an exodus in Greenwich and Manhattan https://t.co/EI8reC8OBj pic.twitter.com/IFp50a7VLB

— Bloomberg (@business) November 27, 2017

Even Bruce McGuire, founder of the Connecticut Hedge Fund Association, understands if wealthy Northeasterners flee the region due to changes in the tax code.

“It would almost be irresponsible if you weren’t thinking about moving,” he said.

The problem for the Connecticut hedge-fund set -- and, more broadly, for a lot of the Wall Street crowd -- is that Republican proposals in both the House and Senate would drive up taxes for many high-earners in the New York City area. By eliminating the deduction for most state and local taxes, an individual making a yearly salary of $1,000,000 -- a figure not uncommon in the financial industry -- would owe the Internal Revenue Service an additional $21,000, according to a preliminary analysis by accounting firm Marcum LLP.

Billionaire hedge fund managers have blazed the trail south in recent years. David Tepper, Paul Tudor Jones and Eddie Lampert are New York-area transplants to Florida, which has no personal income tax.

A final bill could still do away with the hike, but so far there are no signs coming out of Washington that will happen. Financially struggling New Jersey had the sixth-highest individual income rate this year, according to the Federation of Tax Administrators. New York ranked eighth and cash-strapped Connecticut 12th. Nine of the 10 states with the highest individual taxes, including Washington, D.C., voted Democratic in the 2016 presidential election.

Tax Refugees

No one interviewed for this story would talk openly about making plans to move, but Goldman Sachs Group Inc. is estimating that New York City alone could lose as much as 4 percent of its top earners if the bill becomes law. In Florida, where there’s no state income tax, there’s the sense that this is a great opportunity to lure disgruntled tax refugees.

The Miami Downtown Development Authority is throwing a party next month during the annual Art Basel show, and Nitin Motwani, a real estate developer, has invited wealthy Northeasterners who’ve expressed interest in moving to the area. Because the proposed tax changes are practically begging them to relocate, Motwani expects a crowd.

State and local taxes, also called SALT, “can and should be a major catalyst,” said Motwani, a development authority board member. Tax reform will “certainly be something we’re highlighting” at the party, in the Perez Art Museum. “Inertia is a tough thing, but you add on another tax bill and maybe that pushes you over the edge.”

The Long Crisis of New York City's Subways

I first saw Byron York's tweet. I prolly would've ignored this story, but those salary figures are astonishing.

At NYT, "How Politics and Bad Decisions Starved New York’s Subways."

Working for NYC subway pays well. Really well. From NYT: Average compensation for subway worker: $170k. Average for subway manager (2500 of them): $280k. https://t.co/Qv0vaWz1PO pic.twitter.com/UdorS8iE0Z

— Byron York (@ByronYork) November 18, 2017

NEW: The New York subway used to be an international treasure. Now it's the most frequently delayed mass transit system in the world. We investigated what happened and who is to blame. Here's what we found: https://t.co/VgjuBhYgtx … (with @emmagf/@laforgia_)

— Brian M. Rosenthal (@brianmrosenthal) November 18, 2017

The Rich Higgins 'Deep State' Memo

In case you've missed the alt-right backlash over H.R. McMaster, here's some background.

At the Atlantic, "An NSC Staffer Is Forced Out Over a Controversial Memo," and "The War Against H.R. McMaster."

And at Foreign Policy, "Here’s the Memo That Blew Up the NSC":

Fired White House staffer argued "deep state" attacked Trump administration because the president represents a threat to cultural Marxist memes, globalists, and bankers.

City of Anaheim Removes Bus Benches Near Disneyland, So the Homeless Have One Less Place to Sleep

I have no recommended solution here.

After reading about homelessness, you find there are some people who don't want to be institutionalized. They don't want all the fancy rehab treatments and shelters. They want to be free, even with psychiatric problems. So, at some level you'll always have street-people. What to do? Well, for the City of Anaheim, remove more and more of the bus benches near Disneyland, lest you give the homeless too comfortable a shelter for the night.

I guess this is just one of those shake your head stories. I don't know.

At the Los Angeles Times, "While homelessness surges in Disneyland's shadow, Anaheim removes bus benches":

Sweat rolled down Ron Jackson’s face as he pondered, as he does every day just steps from “the Happiest Place on Earth,” where he would sleep.

The homeless man’s hangout in Anaheim had until recently been a grimy bus bench across the street from Disneyland.

Then, one day, the benches around the amusement park — including his regular spot outside of a 7-Eleven at Harbor Boulevard and Katella Avenue — disappeared.

Soon, people were competing for pavement.

“No more sleeping spot. Just concrete,” Jackson, 47, said on a sweltering day. “There were already people claiming the space.”

The vanishing benches were Anaheim’s response to complaints about the homeless population around Disneyland. Public work crews removed 20 benches from bus shelters after callers alerted City Hall to reports of vagrants drinking, defecating or smoking pot in the neighborhood near the amusement park’s entrance, officials said.

The situation is part of a larger struggle by Orange County to deal with a rising homeless population. A survey last year placed the number of those without shelter at 15,300 people, compared with 12,700 two years earlier.

Desperation amid Orange County’s riches

In a wealthy county known for suburban living and sun-dotted beaches, the signs of the homeless crisis are getting harder to ignore.

At the county’s civic center in Santa Ana, homeless encampments — complete with tents and furniture and flooring made from cardboard boxes — block walkways and unnerve some visitors. Along the Santa Ana River near Angel Stadium, whole communities marked by blue tarp have sprung up. In Laguna Beach, a shelter this summer is testing an outreach program in which volunteers walk the streets offering support and housing assistance to homeless people.

Cities across California — notably Los Angeles and San Francisco — are dealing with swelling ranks of the homeless. But officials in Orange County said most suburban communities simply don’t have the resources and experience to keep up.

Susan Price, Orange County's director of care coordination, said officials are trying to build a coordinated approach involving all of the more than 30 disparate cities that takes into account the different causes of homelessness, including economic woes, a lack of healthcare and recent reforms in the criminal justice system.

Most cities "don't have capacity to respond to all the issues of homelessness effectively. That's why we need a regional strategy,” Price said. "Every city has been grappling with this issue and not all cities are full-service so that means we need to find out what each other is doing and figure out how to combine resources.”

The homeless problem often stands in stark contrast to the perceptions many have about Orange County...

Come to think of it, though, sounds like some of the people, just drinking and smoking pot, maybe need to just get cleaned up and find a job. You can't just be bumming for handouts all the time, panhandling and causing "broken windows" style crimes. If that's so, perhaps a city crackdown is indeed a remedy.

But it's like I said, I'm not sure what to do about this. Seems like homelessness took off in the O.C. after the Great Recession hit, and it hasn't subsided much with the so-called economic recovery.

Blame the Democrats, I guess.

Still more at the link.

Public Support for Single-Payer Healthcare

At Pew Research, "Public support for ‘single payer’ health coverage grows, driven by Democrats":

Public support for ‘single payer’ health coverage grows, driven by Democrats https://t.co/RwfANnwRv1 pic.twitter.com/0I1Un1kT1L

— PewResearch FactTank (@FactTank) June 23, 2017

A majority of Americans say it is the federal government’s responsibility to make sure all Americans have health care coverage. And a growing share now supports a “single payer” approach to health insurance, according to a new national survey by Pew Research Center.

Currently, 60% say the federal government is responsible for ensuring health care coverage for all Americans, while 39% say this is not the government’s responsibility. These views are unchanged from January, but the share saying health coverage is a government responsibility remains at its highest level in nearly a decade.

Among those who see a government responsibility to provide health coverage for all, more now say it should be provided through a single health insurance system run by the government, rather than through a mix of private companies and government programs. Overall, 33% of the public now favors such a “single payer” approach to health insurance, up 5 percentage points since January and 12 points since 2014. Democrats – especially liberal Democrats – are much more supportive of this approach than they were even at the start of this year.

Even among those who say the federal government is not responsible for ensuring Americans have health care coverage, there is little public appetite for government withdrawing entirely from involvement in health care coverage. Among the public, 33% say that health care coverage is not the government’s responsibility, but that programs like Medicare and Medicaid should be continued; just 5% of Americans say the government should not be involved at all in providing health insurance.

The issue of the government’s responsibility in ensuring health coverage remains deeply divisive politically, according to the new survey, conducted June 8-18 among 2,504 adults. More than eight-in-ten Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents (85%) say that this responsibility falls to the federal government, while about two-thirds of Republicans and Republican leaners (68%) say it does not.

Still, most Republicans (57%) say the government “should continue programs like Medicare and Medicaid for seniors and the very poor.” Just 9% of Republicans say the government should not be involved in providing health insurance at all...

Democrats are socialists, if we didn't know that by now --- and if they had their way, we'd have much worse healthcare outcomes than we already do. Much more healthcare inequality, especially, with the well-off able to afford private medical care, and those less well-off stuck in substandard government-run Cuba-style "healthcare" hellholes.

And don't forget, Venezuala should be a cautionary tale for leftists, but it's not.

Via Memeorandum.

GOP #ObamaCare Repeal Will Transform American Health Care

From Avik Roy, at Forbes, via Memeorandum, "The New Senate Republican Bill Will Transform American Health Care":

Finished reading the Senate HC bill. Put simply: If it passes, it’ll be the greatest policy achievement by a GOP Congress in my lifetime.

— Avik Roy (@Avik) June 22, 2017

I’m very open to thoughtful critiques of the Senate bill from the left. “MILLIONS WILL DIE” is not it.

— Avik Roy (@Avik) June 23, 2017

The hotly-anticipated Senate Republican health care bill came out on Thursday morning. The airwaves quickly filled up with predictable talking points from both sides. But once the dust settles, it will emerge that the Senate bill will have far-reaching effects on American health care: for the better.

Substantial improvements to the House bill

In March, when House Republicans published their bill to replace Obamacare—the American Health Care Act—I described it in Forbes this way: “GOP’s Obamacare Replacement Will Make Coverage Unaffordable For Millions—Otherwise, It’s Great.” I meant it. There were great things about the House bill, in particular its far-reaching reforms of the Medicaid program.

But Paul Ryan’s bill contained a fatal flaw. Its flat tax credits, which provided identical assistance to the poor and the wealthy, would price millions of near-elderly low-income workers out of the insurance market and trap millions more in poverty.

Fortunately, buried in the House bill was a way out of the morass. Section 202 of the bill contains a transitional schedule of tax credits that was meant to serve as a bridge between the old Obamacare system, ending in 2017, and the new Paul Ryan system, beginning in 2020.

It turns out that if you simply kept that bridge in force, and tossed overboard the Paul Ryan flat tax credit, you’d solve all of these problems with the House bill. By making that change, the near-elderly working poor would be able to afford coverage, and the poverty trap would be eliminated.

And that’s precisely what the Senate bill did! Section 102 of the Senate bill—the Better Care Reconciliation Act of 2017—closely mirrors Section 202 of the House bill, with age- and means-tested tax credits up to 350 percent of the Federal Poverty Level.

Making this change not only solves the problems I described above. It also makes it easier to reform the Medicaid program.

Real Medicaid reforms

The Senate bill includes and refines the best part of the House bill: its reforms of Medicaid, the dysfunctional government-run health care program for the poor whose enrollees have no better health outcomes than the uninsured.

Because the Senate bill’s tax credits are robustly means-tested and available to those below the poverty line, the bill is able to repeal Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion while offering higher-quality coverage to individuals who signed up for Medicaid under the expansion.

The reason that Medicaid’s health outcomes are so poor is because the outdated 1965 Medicaid law places a laundry list of constraints on states’ ability to manage their Medicaid programs. As a result, the main tool states have to keep Medicaid costs under control is to pay doctors and hospitals less and less each year for the same care. Hence, many doctors don’t take Medicaid, and Medicaid enrollees struggle to gain access to care.

The Better Care Reconciliation Act of 2017 addresses these problems in several ways.

First, the bill repeals Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion, and replaces it with tax credits so that low-income Americans can buy the coverage of their choice at an affordable price.

Second, the bill gives states a new set of tools to make their Medicaid programs. For example, under Obamacare, states are only allowed to check if someone is eligible for Medicaid once a year, even if that enrollee has moved to a different state, or becomes no longer eligible, or is no longer alive. Jonathan Ingram of the Foundation for Government Accountability, in a recent report, recommended allowing states to redetermine eligibility more frequently and thereby culling their rolls of ineligible individuals.

Third, the bill puts the legacy Medicaid program on a long-term per-capita cap tied to medical inflation through 2025, and conventional inflation (CPI-U) thereafter. This change is important, because Medicaid per-enrollee spending is growing at a slightly slower rate than Medical inflation; hence, making the program sustainable requires the use of CPI-U. The fiscal sustainability of Medicaid is essential to making sure that those who depend on the program can know it will be there for them in the future...

Keep reading.

Britain Sends Man to Prison for Posting His Thoughts About Muslims to Facebook

At the Daily Wire, via Memeorandum, "British Police Just Imprisoned a Man for Posting Mean Things About Muslims on Facebook."

This what leftists want here. Coming to America? #Islam #Jihad #RadicalLeft #ClimateOfHate #Facebook https://t.co/dikJsikdKQ

— Donald Douglas (@AmPowerBlog) June 22, 2017

This man used Facebook to express his hatred for muslims & has gone to prison #WeStandTogether against hate crimes https://t.co/Bo7OCDADKu

— Sussex Police (@sussex_police) June 20, 2017

"Hate crimes" are thought crimes. Leftists can't stand independent thought.

The Left's Disgraceful Drive to Overturn the 2016 Election

From Pat Buchanan, at Town Hall, "The Impeach-Trump Conspiracy":

Pressed by Megyn Kelly on his ties to President Trump, an exasperated Vladimir Putin blurted out, "We had no relationship at all. ... I never met him. ... Have you all lost your senses over there?"

Yes, Vlad, we have.

Consider the questions that have convulsed this city since the Trump triumph, and raised talk of impeachment.

Did Trump collude with Russians to hack the DNC emails and move the goods to WikiLeaks, thus revealing the state secret that DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz was putting the screws to poor Bernie Sanders?

If not Trump himself, did campaign aides collude with the KGB?

Now, given that our NSA and CIA seemingly intercept everything Russians say to Americans, why is our fabled FBI, having investigated for a year, unable to give us a definitive yes or no?

The snail's pace of the FBI investigation explains Trump's frustration. What explains the FBI's torpor? If J. Edgar Hoover had moved at this pace, John Dillinger would have died of old age.

We hear daily on cable TV of the "Trump-Russia" scandal. Yet, no one has been charged with collusion, and every intelligence official, past or prevent, who has spoken out has echoed ex-acting CIA Director Mike Morrell:

"On the question of the Trump campaign conspiring with the Russians here, there is smoke, but there is no fire, at all. ... There's no little campfire, there's no little candle, there's no spark."

Where are the criminals? Where is the crime?

More.

And ICYMI, at Amazon, Patrick J. Buchanan, Nixon's White House Wars: The Battles That Made and Broke a President and Divided America Forever.

Comey Delivered Drama

Yeah, he's a drama queen, lol.

An interesting piece, at the New York Times:

In a capital used to overcooked spectacle and insufferable congressional testimony, Comey delivered on the hype https://t.co/Ha32DJGvdL

— NYT National News (@NYTNational) June 8, 2017

PREVIOUSLY: "These Photos of Sad Brooklyn Hipsters in a Bar Watching the Comey Hearing Are Hilarious."

These Photos of Sad Brooklyn Hipsters in a Bar Watching the Comey Hearing Are Hilarious.

At Instapundit, "ANOTHER LETDOWN FOR TRUMP DERANGEMENT SYNDROME."

The State Department's a 'Hotbed of Resistance' Against President Trump

Um, bureaucratic officials are supposed to be nonpartisan. This is wrong. Extremely wrong.

At the New York Times:

Important @MarkLandler read on State Dept as "hotbed of resistance," as career diplomats start speaking out on Trump https://t.co/xs8p2LR8yY

— Philip Rucker (@PhilipRucker) June 6, 2017

New York Times Defends Decision to Identify Undercover CIA Agent

Heh.

Of course they do.

At Instapundit, "I’M OLD ENOUGH TO REMEMBER WHEN MENTIONING VALERIE PLAME — WHO WAS NEITHER UNDERCOVER NOR AN AGENT — WAS TREASON OF THE FIRST ORDER: New York Times defends decision to identify undercover CIA agent."

And here it is, so casually reported:

In the @CIA he decimated core Al Qaeda. Now he'll run Iranian operations. https://t.co/xe6mWnXhky

— Adam Goldman (@adamgoldmanNYT) June 2, 2017

Laura Carno, Government Ruins Nearly Everything

*BUMPED.*

At Amazon, Laura Carno, Government Ruins Nearly Everything: Reclaiming Social Issues from Uncivil Servants.

What a Conservative Sees from Inside Trump's Washington

Heh.

Here's Instapundit, "HUH. I NEVER REALLY THOUGHT OF MEGAN MCARDLE AS A CONSERVATIVE..."

Click through for the Megan McArdle piece at Bloomberg, lol. She's libertarian, but on many issues she comes off as fairly doctrinaire conservative.

Naomi Schaefer Riley Interview at Prager University (VIDEO)

Following-up from Tuesday, "Ending the Trust System Will Do More for American Indians Than Changing the Name of the Washington Redskins."

At Prager U:

ICYMI: Naomi Schaefer Riley, The New Trail of Tears

Following-up from yesterday, "Ending the Trust System Will Do More for American Indians Than Changing the Name of the Washington Redskins."

At Amazon, Naomi Schaefer Riley, The New Trail of Tears: How Washington Is Destroying American Indians.

Ending the Trust System Will Do More for American Indians Than Changing the Name of the Washington Redskins

Naomi Schaefer Riley's the author of The New Trail of Tears: How Washington Is Destroying American Indians.

Reading her book was one of the reasons I've been on the frontier America jag for the last few months.

And here she is with a great new video for Prager University.

Not to be missed. I love these clips:

The Arrogance of Blue America

From the excellent Joel Kotkin, at the Daily Beast:

The arrogance of blue America https://t.co/oY5RV81AdE pic.twitter.com/4J41gCmSs2

— The Daily Beast (@thedailybeast) May 1, 2017

Trump Will Test Democrats' Tax Patriotism

From Professor Glenn Reynolds, at Instapundit, "MY USA TODAY COLUMN: Trump Will Test Democrats’ Tax Patriotism: President’s plan would make high-tax blue states pay their fair share."

California's Crisis of the Interior

Following-up from yesterday, "Jerry Brown Wins $52 Billion Gasoline Tax in California (VIDEO)."

From Joel Kotkin, at the O.C. Register, a great piece, "The Other California: A Flyover State Within a State":

California may never secede, or divide into different states, but it has effectively split into entities that could not be more different. On one side is the much-celebrated, post-industrial, coastal California, beneficiary of both the Tech Boom 2.0 and a relentlessly inflating property market. The other California, located in the state’s interior, is still tied to basic industries like homebuilding, manufacturing, energy and agriculture. It is populated largely by working- and middle-class people who, overall, earn roughly half that of those on the coast.

Over the past decade or two, interior California has lost virtually all influence, as Silicon Valley and Bay Area progressives have come to dominate both state politics and state policy. “We don’t have seats at the table,” laments Richard Chapman, president and CEO of the Kern Economic Development Corporation. “We are a flyover state within a state.”

Virtually all the polices now embraced by Sacramento — from water and energy regulations to the embrace of sanctuary status and a $15-an-hour minimum wage — come right out of San Francisco central casting. Little consideration is given to the needs of the interior, and little respect is given to their economies.

San Francisco, for example, recently decided to not pump oil from land owned by the city in Kern County, although one wonders what the new rich in that region use to fill the tanks of their BMWs. California’s “enlightened” green policies help boost energy prices 50 percent above those of neighboring states, which makes a bigger difference in the less temperate interior, where many face longer commutes than workers in more compact coastal areas...

Keep reading.