OT: Why there are no new jobs?

Texas is mostly toast. I can't really speak for Austin, which is probably above the norm, but the Dallas area was pretty hot for a long time and it's not any more.

Some of that was Sarbox, some of it was the Kaleeforhnyuh VC community recoiling in horror at Enron.

It should, but it's not nearly prevalent enough.

Seriously - everybody I have known who lived in NOLA loved it. Bugs and all :)

I'll have to ask my pals. They griped about prices, didn't mention crime. Maybe it's better since the big rinse-cycle.

I think of it as the land of the thirty-seven forms of moisture.

I've actually enjoyed every place I've ever lived, NOLA included. It definitely has its charms (including the bugs), but nothing that justifies the housing hikes--that's taxpayer magic.

Cheers, James Arthur

Doesn't work in all cases for all workers, plainly, but for some, yes.

Apparently so. We evidently run a great deal lighter and faster, so I was told.

I'd never have expected that. One assumes they all know it'll flood again. Or not.

Interesting. There's no reason you shouldn't be able to make a cool spot anywhere. It comes down to various political policies first and foremost, and second maybe is the local culture.

Cheers, James Arthur

I lived there for 30 years and left. It's not the best place to do electronics.

Loads of software engineers live on the Isle of Skye, which does have a bridge to the rest of Scotland.

But probably to immigrants from Germany, like Jeorg. In reality, Germany has got a population of 80 million and the US has a population of 320 million, and should be able to support a wider range of specialist designers.

In a close-linked world, you'd expect some international design out-sourcing just to get access to very narrow specialities.

Sounds like New York or London. Places like Sydney and Berlin do have rough neighbourhoods, but effective social security and adequate council services do seem to have made them less attractive to rats.

As pointed out in "The Spirit Level" the US as whole is something of a slum, though some areas are more egalitarian and less slum-infested than others.

ped

sed

housing-fraud-n2058059

les

t,

ed

or

is

cult

are

ces."

That's a solution. It usually goes with absence of council services that wo uld have helped her stay in her house a bit longer. There's not a lot of po int to not taxing out of her house if she ups and burns it down, with her i n it, as elderly Grannies have been known to do.

:-)

My experience was almost exactly the opposite.

But it does tax the savings that have already been taxed.

Not really. You just need a 2nd home there. Your main residence one can be in another state where you make a living.

Ever heard of the term "goulash communism"? That's what Hungary did, the country that invented this wonderful meat dish which I could eat all day long. Outwardly teh country looked communist so the comrades from the Soviet Union would not become too upset. Yet they allowed all kinds of enterprise which was not communist at all. That's just what China does but on a mucn larger scale.

Production is even sent to real communist countries. As long as no trade secrets are at stake and no large investemnet is needed that could evaporate after the next regime change such outsourcing can be a very lucrative move.

Customers are specifying our Mexican plant over the Chinese. Everything being equal, they wouldn't care.

The Fair Tax doesn't tax *any* savings. Only spendings. It's really more of a VAT tax, with a pile more honesty, and a "prebate" to make it progressive enough to have a chance (there's something for the lefties to tweak).

No, you have to declare residency. If your driver's license says CA, you're going to pay CA tax, sooner or later.

Ok, let me explain this with an example:

a. Mr. "Spend-it-all" earns $1300, pays no tax, then buys a big TV for $1000 plus $300 in "new VAT". So $1300 from the fruits of his labor buy him a TV.

b. Mr.Frugal earned $1300 in the pre-VAT days, pay $300 in taxes and saves the remaining $1000 for a rainy day. Eventually he decides that he has sufficient savings and wants ti buy the same big TV set. But now they instituted the new VAT. He finds out that they double-taxed him because while Mr.Spend-it-all got his TV with $1300 of wages Mr.Frugal no longer can. He must pay $300 more than Mr.Spend-it-all.

Fair? Not. Therefore, I will not support this.

I think you misunderstand. You can have income in two different states and get taxed in each state proportionately. You can also have a residence in two or more states and what you buy there and what stays in each is taxed per regulations in that state. I know people like that. Ask a CPA.

Yes, there is the problem of retirees, particularly Roths but I predict they'll get screwed anyway). That'll have to be fixed. The plan won't fly anyway because it requires a Constitutional amendment and that'll never happen again.

...and wait for the state of residency to catch up with them. They'll lose.

And it shouldn't happen.

AFAIR California lost a major case in that respect, to the tune of many million Dollars in jury awards.

The Constitution should *never* be amended? The 16th amendment shouldn't be repealed?

Nonsense. There would be no awards is such a case. At most a refund of taxes paid.

Oh yeah?

Come on Joerg! That's a little more than tax collection. That's like saying that Obama's IRS tricks are 1040 recalculations.

Nope. It's a guy they tried to extract taxes from where CA had no legal basis to do so, and then they tried to strong-arm him. The result was what I said above.

Good Lord, Joerg. Read the damned article. The problem wasn't that they tried to extract the taxes but *HOW* they went about it. No, that wasn't the point above.