Rush Leaves NYC

WBAP ^ | Limbaugh | Rush

[Young Werther]

Radio Dialogue paraphrase:

Rush was discussing the Audit extremes foisted on him by the State of New York. The new New York State and City Taxes are targeting "rich folk". He will broadcast from his Florida home but also wants to find a Hurricane proof have. He said that he might move to Texas because there is no State Income tax.

We Lone Star T=State Freepers should show our support and invite hime to "come on down".

Of course as a DFW_phile I'd like to see him in my own backyard!

[MayflowerMadam]

“It could work.”

We hope to be gone within the year. Aiming for Tennessee.

[Dan Nunn]

I’m in the process of finding a home and moving 5 minutes over the border to Pennsylvania.

The downside is that there is no reciprocity agreement with Pennsylvania for state income taxes so I will still be taxed by my employer at the NY rate. However, the property tax differences are $29 per thousand assessed here in NY to $14 per thousand assessed in PA.

I guess I’m one of the lucky NYers in the Southern Tier who can literally move without uprooting a job, friends and family. I feel bad for those a little further north.

[DallasMike]

Dallas is the perfect place for Rush. It’s a short flight to both coasts and, though he would have to dodge the occasional tornado, he wouldn’t have any hurricane problems.

[pgkdan]

Someone with Rush Limbaugh’s resources doesn’t need to worry about a hurricane in Florida

The issue is that he daoesn't want his broadcast interrupted during or in the immediate aftermath os a storm. Of course he can afford to rebuild, that's not the issue.

[Churchillspirit]

....and he can socialize with Dubya.

[Broker]

Bermuda.

[PzLdr]

I thought there was no income tax in Florida. Why doesn’t he stay there?

[donna]

Isn’t that in Tornado Alley?

[AppyPappy]

Nevada or Tennesssee

[TheBattman]

Please explain why a city as large and as filled with business, retail, and commercial enterprises as NY City, they can’t exist on a sales tax? Foot - the license for taxi cabs ought to fund most of city government!

But in all seriousness... This is so insane. Of course, the free-market solution still exists, if the wealthy would get off their lazy bums and actually act on their anger. Do as Rush is discussing - move to a more taxpayer-friendly location. If all the rich folks bellyaching about this in NYC did - then the idiotic “wealth penalty” would go away.

[a fool in paradise]

She used to be on Northern Exposure and then Friday Nights Lights.

She deliberately chose to leave Hollywood (FNL is produced in Texas).

http://www.janineturner.com/index.html

[Myrddin]

Isn’t that in Tornado Alley?

Rush can build a studio that is tornado worthy. It's not a place he will be using for extended periods of time.

[for-q-clinton]

California has considered taxing high-earning people and businesses who decide to escape to other states.

How would that work? I guess they could tax you on your last return. Did you move out of the state? Did you make over 300,000K (or some other arbitrary number that will go down over time)? Then you must pay a 90% penalty for not keeping that job in the state. But then I wonder what happens when someone leaves the state because they lost their job? Also wouldn't that violate interstate commerce? I guess they could do it like Alaska, but in reverse. You know the default tax rate is 90% but if you currently live in CA it's reduced. I guess everyone would move on 1 Jan ;-) I just think either the law would end up being illegal or completely inneffective.

[a fool in paradise]

Rush seems to also be trying to spur an exodus of corporations (and wealthy earners) from New York state.

[Dr. Ursus]

There’s no sanity clause!

[Young Werther]

She rose to Celebrity status on the TV show Northern Exposure. It's setting was Alaska.

She is conservative and curvaceous! And along with her beauty she has brains!

She's down home friendly. One day at the Texas State Fair here in Dallas my family was walking down the midway. There was a stirring in the crowd. As we approached we could see everyone was watching as Janine was walking along the midway carrying her child and returning a Halo to everyone who was saying, "Hi Janine!" My family and I said Hi too!

[MrB]

When Texas becomes the Republic of Texas - Free America,

something will have to be done about Austin.

[domeika]

What is that story about the 10 beer drinkers who share the tab via our tax code? When the rich guy quits drinking beer, the others go sober.

I never heard that one, but I remember hearing this on Cavuto (Fox), and then copied it from their site. Slightly different but same premise...

This was written by an economics professor, sorry, don’t have the name…

Let’s put tax cuts in terms everyone can understand Suppose that everyday, 10 men go to dinner. The bill for all 10 comes to $100. If it was paid the way we pay our taxes, the first four men would pay nothing; the fifth would pay $1; the sixth would pay $3; the seventh $7; the eighth $12; the ninth $18. The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59. The ten men ate dinner in the restaurant every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement until the owner threw them a curve. “Since you are all such good customers,” he said, “I’m going to reduce the cost of your daily meal by $20. Now dinner for the 10 costs $80. The first four are unaffected. They still eat for free. Can you figure out how to divvy up the $20 savings among the remaining six so that everyone gets his fair share? The men realize that $20 divided by six is $3.33, but if they subtract that from everybody’s share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would end up being paid to eat their meal. The restaurant owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man’s bill by roughly the same amount and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay. And so, the fifth man paid nothing, the sixth pitched in $2, the seventh paid $5, the eighth paid $9, the ninth $12, leaving the tenth man with a bill of $52 instead of $59. Outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings. “I only got a dollar out of the $20,” declared the sixth man pointing to the tenth, “and he got $7.” “Yeah, that’s right,” exclaimed the fifth man, “I only saved a dollar, too. It’s unfair that he got seven times more than me!” “That’s true,” shouted the seventh man. “Why should he get $7 back when I got only $2? The wealthy get all the breaks.” “Wait a minute,” yelled the first four men in unison. “We didn’t get anything at all. The system exploits the poor.” The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up. The next night he didn’t show up for dinner, so the nine sat down and ate without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important: they were $52 short! And that, boys and girls and college instructors, is how the tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up at the table anymore. There are lots of good restaurants in Switzerland and the Caribbean.” Some of you might argue that this little story trivializes the tax debate. But not me. I think it puts it in good perspective. When opponents of tax cuts play the class game, remember that dinner scene and ask yourself this question: Who is feasting on whom? The rich guy that got a break, but still paid the largest share of the bill, or the poorer guys, some of whom didn’t pay anything at all? The rich guy could afford it and paid. The poorer guys could not and did not. Some people want something for nothing and others say nothing for those who have something. I say, enough. Because the only one really feasting at this dinner is the guy who owns the restaurant. And the only one feasting at this ridiculous tax system is the guy who owns the trough — Uncle Sam. He might like to keep us arguing like this. After all, he’s getting the money and lately he’s been feasting pretty well. We give. He takes. We argue. He takes more. We stop and start thinking about the lunacy of it all, he takes out ads. The problem, my friends, isn’t the rich and what they pay, but the government and what it takes. Because trust me, the restaurant owner is happy and so is Uncle Sam.

[Doctor Raoul]

What did he have left in NYC? He’s been broadcasting from the “Southern Command” for years and years.

[Plumres]

I work for a company that is headquartered in New York City. If I go from where I work in Pittsburgh to the headquarters even for one day I owe New York taxes and must file a return with New York. I actually lose money since Pittsburgh, PA taxes are much lower than New York's. I guess it will cost me something like $20 a day to visit my home office!

The real problem resides in the fact that there is different tier levels for salary and of course New York is the highest level and Pittsburgh is the lowest level. So someone doing my same job in New York gets about $40,000 more a year because of the high cost of living in New York. I should get their pay for every day that I am in New York to make up for the difference.