Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Why Did NY Based Airlines, Leave NY?  
User currently offline747400sp From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3598 posts, RR: 2
Posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 9355 times:

Back around the 60's, Pan Am, TWA and AA was based in New York, but later in years, AA move their base to DFW, TWA move their base to STL and I believe Pan Am move their base to MIA. Why did these airlines leave New York? JFK was Pan Am and TWA bread and butter and AA still has a good bussiness flying back and fourth from California to JFK, so why would they want to leave New York?

62 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineEWRandMDW From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 416 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 9241 times:

I think high NY taxes (personal and business) and unit costs for office space were part of the reason. Availability of land was another. Texas has no state income tax and plenty of land to develop infrastructure which surely helped AA decide their move. TW's move to STL was prompted to be next to their primary hub. PA and EA both moved to MIA probably for tax reasons and because Latin America was so important to their business. They could all make money in NY, but preferred to keep more of it by not having to spend as much in NY.

Why did FL move their HQ from ATL to MCO? Why did B6 threaten to move from NYC to MCO? It eventually boils down to $$. A prestige address will get you only so far.


User currently offlinegdg9 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 624 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 9156 times:

New York's ridiculously high taxes.

User currently offlinerjpieces From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 8898 times:

Very interesting question. It was not just airlines leaving NYC--they were just part of a massive corporate exodus. NYC was in its low days in the mid-to-late 1970s--crime was out of control, the infrastructure was declining, strikes were common, the city was on the verge of bankruptcy (epitomized by the famous NY Daily News Headline: Ford to City, Drop Dead), etc. The city was in the middle of a transition away from being a manufacturing base (hence the abandoned piers on the West Side of Manhattan) which, naturally, had a giant affect on its economy.

Check out this old article about it:
http://www.nytimes.com/1987/09/23/ny...ng-from-new-york.html?pagewanted=1

And this is a very interesting documentary on YouTube about NY in the 70s:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ex-iMzSNcrE

But also check out the current state of the economy of NYC:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_City#Economy

"New York is distinctive for its high concentrations of advanced service sector firms in fields such as law, accountancy, banking and management consultancy.

The financial, insurance, health care, and real estate industries form the basis of New York's economy. The city is also the most important center for mass media, journalism and publishing in the United States, and is the preeminent arts center in the country. "

Many, many major companies are still headquartered there. The main difference, as I understand, from the 1960s and 1970s, is that there are many, many major companies headquartered in other American cities as well (Atlanta, Miami, Dallas, Houston, etc).

Quoting EWRandMDW (Reply 1):
Why did B6 threaten to move from NYC to MCO?

That was just internal posturing to get a better deal from the city. It can't really be compared to when the airlines left NYC.

If anybody is interested, I have an old PDF NYTimes article about American's decision to leave NYC. Message me and i'll try to send it along.

[Edited 2010-04-10 07:56:42]

User currently offlineseabosdca From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 5407 posts, RR: 4
Reply 4, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 8698 times:

NY is an expensive city to run a business in for all of the reasons mentioned above, in roughly the following order of importance:

- high wages & labor costs
- high real estate costs
- lots of competition to locate there
- high taxes

Therefore the only reason a business should locate there is if it gets some financial advantage out of being there to recoup the costs. The businesses that get such an advantage are not country-wide manufacturing or service businesses; they're businesses in the areas that have expertise concentrated in New York, such as finance, international business, law, advertising, media, creative industries, and the like.

An airline, unlike a firm in any of those businesses, gets little or nothing out of paying more to locate in NYC.


User currently offlinesrbmod From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 8652 times:

Quoting EWRandMDW (Reply 1):

Why did FL move their HQ from ATL to MCO?

To further distance the airline from its' days as Valujet after they bought out AirTran. The City of Atlanta has tried on several occasions to woo FL to move their HQ back to ATL, but MCO manages to sweeten the pot enough to keep them there.

Quoting 747400sp (Thread starter):
I believe Pan Am move their base to MIA.

At the time PA moved to MIA, they were trying to salvage the airline, as they were in bankruptcy. When they moved out of the Pan Am Building, they were using four floors of the building (At one point, they used fifteen floors in that building.). Getting out of NYC probably helped them survive a little bit longer, as even if DL had made the final $25 million payment for the PA assets they bought, that money would have only helped the airline survive another week or two at best unless someone came to their rescue.


User currently offlineFlyingSicilian From Italy, joined Mar 2009, 1323 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 8643 times:

Quoting rjpieces (Reply 3):
Many, many major companies are still headquartered there. The main difference, as I understand, from the 1960s and 1970s, is that there are many, many major companies headquartered in other American cities as well (Atlanta, Miami, Dallas, Houston, etc).

True NYC is still tops but the "sunbelt" is huge.
NYC has the most F500 HQs with Houston #2, Dallas #3, Atlanta and chicago 4 and 5.



“Without seeing Sicily it is impossible to understand Italy.Sicily is the key of everything.”-Goethe "Journey to Italy"
User currently offlineAADC10 From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 2088 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 8596 times:

It used to be, back when Delta was a second tier player, that nearly all of the large airlines with the notable exception of United were headquartered within a few blocks of each other in midtown. This was no doubt to be near the capital markets to obtain the extensive financing that the airlines need to operate. When NYC declined to its nadir in the 1970s, the airlines moved their corporate headquarters to less expensive more livable cities, usually at their main hub.

With deregulation, moving out of New York cut costs and in the jet age, it was only corporate pride that necessitated a Manhattan headquarters.


User currently offlineLufthansa411 From Germany, joined Jan 2008, 692 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 8474 times:

Quoting AADC10 (Reply 7):
This was no doubt to be near the capital markets to obtain the extensive financing that the airlines need to operate. When NYC declined to its nadir in the 1970s, the airlines moved their corporate headquarters to less expensive more livable cities, usually at their main hub.
Quoting EWRandMDW (Reply 1):
I think high NY taxes (personal and business) and unit costs for office space were part of the reason. Availability of land was another.

I think it is a combination of these factors. Before the 1960's NYC had high rent and taxes, but it was very much the centre of business in the USA. "The streets are paved with gold" comes to mind. Plus, most businesses want to base operations near a major customer base, and before the 60's that was for the most part NY. During the 70's though, the gold disappeared from the streets of NY, and financial decline set in. It is one thing to pay higher taxes while at the same time getting a prospering city in return. It is quite another to be paying relatively high taxes to a city that had lost its lustre. In my estimation, companies decided during that time that NYC had declined to the point where the name of the city no longer equalled prestige, and moved their headquarters to a cheaper place.

In short, during the 70's the "brand of NYC" was in a coma, and companies no longer wanted to pay to be associated with a dying brand, especially companies that had customers from all over the country.

Quoting gdg9 (Reply 2):
New York's ridiculously high taxes.

My permanent US address is in NY. Most people I know from there groan at having to pay NY taxes, but also see the services they get compared to other states and are satisfied with them. If your profile is correct and you are not a NYS resident, I wouldn't expect you to understand that living in NY and visiting tax wise are two completely different things. The services you get as a resident far outweighs what most other states provide for ordinary residents, but they are certainly not free.

I wish members on this forum would stop tax-bashing without realising what is actually received.



Nothing in life is to be feared; it is only to be understood.
User currently offlineMasseyBrown From United States of America, joined Dec 2002, 5411 posts, RR: 7
Reply 9, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 8472 times:

Expense, inconvenience, inability to recruit executives, and no compelling need for a NY headquarters.


I love long German words like 'Freundschaftsbezeigungen'.
User currently offlineN747PA From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 56 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 8223 times:

Here's some info about TWA's move from Manhattan to Mt. Kisco:

http://www.nytimes.com/1987/07/19/re...s-arrival-of-twa.html?pagewanted=1


User currently offlinejfklganyc From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 3447 posts, RR: 5
Reply 11, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 8131 times:

I am so sick of these threads turning into a New York bash fest.

I watched a bunch of people in Dallas and the sunbelt tell me JetBlue would be happy in Orlando because NYC was so expensive and horrible.

Guess what? They won't be going to Orlando. Why? Good deal from city and NY is the place to be.

BTW PA was always based in NYC (on their death bed they went to MIA)

Don't like NYC follow the exodus out the door . . . just remember their are more people coming in then going out.

1920 5,620,048 17.9%
1930 6,930,446 23.3%
1940 7,454,995 7.6%
1950 7,891,957 5.9%
1960 7,781,984 −1.4%
1970 7,894,862 1.5%
1980 7,071,639 −10.4%
1990 7,322,564 3.5%
2000 8,008,288 9.4%
2008* 8,363,710 4.4%

Show me another city in the US that has gained 1 million people in 18 years.


User currently offlineTeamAmerica From United States of America, joined Sep 2006, 1761 posts, RR: 23
Reply 12, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 8068 times:

Quoting gdg9 (Reply 2):
New York's ridiculously high taxes.

Not just the taxes - the cost of housing was also high. If an AA employee wanted a home to raise kids, he often had no choice but to live in New Jersey. That poor soul was then paying income taxes to the State of New Jersey, State of New York, and the City of New York. Absolutely brutal. Most of the workers who moved to Texas with AA realized a huge increase in their standard of living.      

Quoting Lufthansa411 (Reply 8):
I wish members on this forum would stop tax-bashing without realising what is actually received.

I'm with you Lufthansa411, but there are limits. People sometimes"vote with their feet". That's what AA did.  



Failure is not an option; it's an outcome.
User currently offlinemilesrich From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 1995 posts, RR: 6
Reply 13, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 7990 times:

All you xxxxxxx's and your "high taxes" are the reason for everything, other posters have put it in perspective. Not one airline left NYC because of high taxes. While taxes may have been an issue of lesser importance, the labor and rental costs of operating a general office in Manhattan just didn't make sense. The cost of living and commuting in NYC is so much higher than in the Mid Cities of the DFW area where American relocated. The other airlines that left their NY headquarters all ended up being liquidated in bankruptcy: TWA, Pan Am and Eastern. While NYC is the largest O&D market in the USA, there is no reason, except the proximity to Wall Street, to have a corporate headquarters there. Mid level managers and clerical people cannot usually no afford to live in Manhattan, necessitating long commutes, plus being in Manhattan requires salaries to be much higher than other cities. While United was based in Chicago for decades, only the three mentioned above were headquarted in NY. Northeast was Boston based until Storer Broadcasting, a Miami company, bought them. National was headquarted in Miami. Eastern, originally controlled by GM, moved their headquarters to Miami long before their downfall. Western was based in Los Angeles, as was Continental after relocating there from Denver, probably because of Bob Six and his Hollywood "love" connections, (he was married to Ethel Merman and then Audrey Meadows). Capital was based in Washington, DC. Northwest was always based in Minneapolis. Delta in Atlanta, prior to that, Monroe, LA. Chicago & Southern was Memphis based. Then there were the former regionals, none of which were based in NY. Southern at ATL; North Central at MSP, Ozark in STL, Allegheny at DCA, Lake Central at IND, Mohawk at UCA, and before that Ithaca, Central at GSW-ACF, Frontier at DEN, TTA/TI at HOU, Bonanza at PHX, Pacific at SFO, West Coast at BFI, Piedmont at INT, and PSA at SAN, and AirCal at Newport Beach, near SNA. (Did I get them all)?

User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11557 posts, RR: 61
Reply 14, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 7912 times:

Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 11):
I watched a bunch of people in Dallas and the sunbelt tell me JetBlue would be happy in Orlando because NYC was so expensive and horrible.

Well, actually, I remember that thread well because I was one of these "bunch of people" and I don't personally recall ever saying that JetBlue moving was a done deal, but rather that economically, a move would certainly be logical - for all the reasons that are undeniable reality whether you like to except it or not (low costs, low taxes, etc.). New York did well on this one by structuring yet another deal to bribe a big employer to stay. We'll see how long those sorts of deals last with the fiscal situation in the City and the State of late.

Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 11):
Don't like NYC follow the exodus out the door . . . just remember their are more people coming in then going out.

1920 5,620,048 17.9%
1930 6,930,446 23.3%
1940 7,454,995 7.6%
1950 7,891,957 5.9%
1960 7,781,984 −1.4%
1970 7,894,862 1.5%
1980 7,071,639 −10.4%
1990 7,322,564 3.5%
2000 8,008,288 9.4%
2008* 8,363,710 4.4%

We've already been through this. New York City's population is growing - albeit at a slower rate than in the past - because of immigrants coming from other countries for whom New York, with its unsustainable social welfare programs, regressive and redistributionary taxes, crumbling infrastructure and astronomical livings costs, is a decided step-up from the origins from whence they came.

But for people who already live in New York, the picture is very different. New York City continues to be a net loser of domestic migrants, meaning people who already live in the United States moving somewhere else in those same 50 United States. By that measure, New York (the City, not the State) lost nearly 500,000 people between 2000-2008.

Those are the facts whether you want to accept them or not - you continuing to deny them doesn't make them any less true.

Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 11):
Show me another city in the US that has gained 1 million people in 18 years.

I'll show you a metro area that's added 1 million people in the last decade, let alone the last 18 years. In fact, I'll name you four.

Since 2000, according to Census estimates, the metropolitan areas of Atlanta, Dallas-Fort Worth, Houston and Phoenix have all each added more than 1,000,000 new residents. Since all of those metro areas are considerably smaller than New York, in percentage terms, that's an even larger increase.

Quoting TeamAmerica (Reply 12):
People sometimes"vote with their feet". That's what AA did.

And that's what millions of other people are currently doing, which is why after this year it is widely expected that Texas will be gaining 3-4 new congressional districts, and a slew of other "Sunbelt" states will also be gaining at least 1, while New York State is projected to lose 1.

Quoting milesrich (Reply 13):
Not one airline left NYC because of high taxes. While taxes may have been an issue of lesser importance, the labor and rental costs of operating a general office in Manhattan just didn't make sense.

And why do you suppose those labor and rental costs were so high? Could taxes perchance have a role to play?   

[Edited 2010-04-10 15:28:32]

User currently offlinedw9115 From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 449 posts, RR: 2
Reply 15, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 7692 times:

All of it just about came back to taxes in some way or another and its not just airlines Citi Bank moved all of their credit card operations to South Dakota in the early 80's because of taxes and re-incorporated it as a separate company within CitiGroup because of taxes.

User currently offlinejfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8337 posts, RR: 7
Reply 16, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 7557 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Pan AM actually never left New York, it was based at its Grand Central skyscraper until the European routes were purchased by Delta and Transferred on 11/1/91. The South American Rump was to be based in Miami, that last part of Pan AM died on 12/6/91( could be a day off).


Eastern was based at Rockefeller center and moved to Miami in the 1960's.

TWA was only based in St. Louis post Icahn, it was on Third Ave and Icahn had it in Mt. Kisco( a suburb of NYC) for a time. ST. Louis was only in teh 1990's long after Icahn had done his damage.


AA did move out in 1979 to be close to its DFW center. This was to be the only airline to leave New York in the 1970's.


User currently offlinethegreatRDU From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 2310 posts, RR: 4
Reply 17, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 7057 times:

Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 11):
I am so sick of these threads turning into a New York bash fest.

It's no secret the taxes, cost of living, labor costs, and real estate prices are high especially compared to the south...were the businesses mentioned sought refuge to....



Our Returning Champion
User currently offlinecf6ppe From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 351 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 6969 times:

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 16):
Eastern was based at Rockefeller center and moved to Miami in the 1960's.

IIRC, by the middle/late '70's. there were approx. 400 EAL personnel remaining in the NYC business location. Since about 90 percent+ of the EAL management and office folks were at the MIA headquarters, it was decided that it would be fruitful to move the rest to MIA hqs. I do remember having a pool of ex NYC folks to fill openings with....

In the above I'm not including those EAL folks based at JFK, EWR or LGA...

No disrespect to NYC or NY intended with above statement; I'm just trying to bring forward what I remember... (from 30-35 years ago)   


User currently offlineisitsafenow From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 4984 posts, RR: 23
Reply 19, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 6606 times:

Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 11):

We like New York. We just dont want to base our business there.
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ should be in our pockets, not Albany or NYC city halls'.
Its all politics, guy and nothin' but.
safe



If two people agree on EVERYTHING, then one isn't necessary.
User currently offlinecaljn From United States of America, joined Oct 2007, 208 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 6356 times:

I live in Los Angeles in high tax California...and would not have a problem living in NY and paying their taxes.
Like someone said earlier, taxes may be higher but the benefits are worth it IMO.
People throughout the globe come to CA and NY and MA for that matter to be educated. Classic Democratic states offering true quality of life. (not defined as owning a mcmansion in some flat suburban sprawl.)
The most talented and ambitious people are drawn to these places enhancing quality of life overall.
Were do these sunbelt locations stand in the major demographic rankings?
Education, income, literacy, teen pregnancy, divorce. I'd rather pay a few add'l dollars in taxes, thanks.


User currently offlineCLEpirate From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 78 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 6233 times:

Not all the airlines left...CommutAir is still based in Plattsburgh   

User currently offlineCLEpirate From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 78 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 6182 times:

oh boy i have egg on my face...they moved to Burlington, VT. All the airlines did move!   

User currently offlinejoeman From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 711 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 6049 times:

So in the never ending a.net tradition of "My place is better than yours", does NYC now qualify as an undoubtedly "sunbelt" people expression as a "rustbelt" city or is that only reserved for a few midwest cities that happened to have a few steel factories close up and are ignorantly touted as "ghost towns" by idiots promoting their self-perceived glory of the place their from?

Everywhere has had gains and losses and the "sunbelt" people have been quite successful in exaggerating their riches and the woes of the so called "rustbelt".

They've done a great job in pretending their local governments don't need tax money in one form or another(s) to function.


User currently offlinemax999 From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 1039 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 5744 times:

For all the crap that New York, its politics, its way of life, and its economy has taken in this thread...Let's take a closer look at the stats and we will see the 'sunbelt' economic miracle in some states is an illusion.

Unemployment Rate
Nevada 13.2%
Florida 12.2%
South Carolina 12.5%
North Carolina 11.2%
Alabama 11.1%
Mississippi 11.4%
Georgia 10.5%
National Average 9.7%

I don't think low taxes are a panacea to help to bring jobs and businesses to these states...other things must be missing from this equation.

New York 8.8%

Quoting dw9115 (Reply 15):
All of it just about came back to taxes in some way or another and its not just airlines Citi Bank moved all of their credit card operations to South Dakota in the early 80's because of taxes and re-incorporated it as a separate company within CitiGroup because of taxes.

False...Citibank moved there because of changes in South Dakota usury laws allowed the bank to charge a super high interest rate on their credit cards. New York's laws are more consumer friendly while South Dakota laws allowed banks to gouge customers. And banks are allowed to follow the usury laws depending on what state they are based in...so South Dakota became the natural choice.

Proof: http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2006/02/23/siouxfalls



All the things I really like to do are either immoral, illegal, or fattening.
25 dw9115 : You forgot to mention this little quote from the article "helped by the lack of a personal or corporate income tax." Yes the law change in usury laws
26 phatfarmlines : Certainly not for a cost advantage. Comparing ATL to NYC on a cost level is an apple/orange comparison.
27 EWRandMDW : I lived in NYC from 1975 through 1986, 3 years in the East Village, then a year in Park Slope Brooklyn and finally 8 years in Flushing Queens. I had t
28 jfklganyc : "I'll show you a metro area that's added 1 million people in the last decade, let alone the last 18 years. In fact, I'll name you four. Since 2000, ac
29 Post contains links commavia : If you think so, that's of course completely respectable. Although, since the places you're describing are all losing net domestic migrants at fairly
30 airzim : I've lived in California, New Jersey, Virginia, and Houston just prior to moving to New York City which I where I am now. I didn't move here because i
31 Post contains images ready5bird : If it was truly taxes there wouldn't be a need for a seperate corporate entity. Most credit card operators are based out of SD or UT for the simple r
32 caljn : [quote=commavia,reply=30]It's just a matter of degree. According to the Tax Foundation, the 10 states with the highest tax burdens are (in order) New
33 commavia : And that's the beauty of this great country of ours - there's a place for everyone. If your American dream is being in the center of all the action -
34 jfklganyc : I'll add a personal note on here. When I was training with Eagle we used to stay at a run-down motel named the Ballpark Inn in Arlington. (It has sinc
35 huaiwei : Yes, so if you are an airline executive, which city are you going to base your operations in...a high-rise, high-density 24-hour global hub of busine
36 commavia : Stupidity knows no geography. That sort of crap is of course close-minded and dumb. But who are we kidding? Like prejudice and bigotry don't exist in
37 commavia : Well, apparently the latter, since today there are only two U.S. carriers based in what I would call "24-hour global hub[s] of business, culture and
38 dw9115 : Well yes there is still a need for a separate corporate entity its called liability. They are all still owned by the same holding group but by having
39 Post contains images TeamAmerica : I hear you, and can offer no excuses. I just hope you know that there are more than a few of us left here in the Lone Star State that continue to fig
40 airzim : The irony of living in NYC, is I pay more taxes then most other American's at the same income level. But I have yet to see one Tea Bagger from NY City
41 WA707atMSP : Eastern did not move their headquarters from New York City to Miami until 1973 / 74. Prior to the move, EA had a large presence in Miami - their main
42 seabosdca : Self-selection. If high taxes make you froth at the mouth, you'll leave NYC (or not move there) because of the high taxes. If they only bug you a bit
43 dw9115 : Well what you said show's how little you know about the tax system you don't pay more for people in other states you pay more because you pay the sta
44 Post contains links seabosdca : Incorrect. New York is one of the 10 states -- mostly high-tax, high-population, relatively liberal states -- that receives the least back for its fe
45 aa757first : I'd let you slide if you were in the Bay, but you're from LA, America's cultural wasteland. Like others said, the cost of living was extremely high.
46 caljn : Ouch. You told me. Demographic reality, blue states have better educated, wealthier populations.
47 Post contains links commavia : ... that are leaving those states for less expensive states where their education can score them a great job and their wealth can buy them far more p
48 aa757first : I live in California as well.
49 caljn : Don't mistake a group of people who "are looking for a change" for a variety of economic reasons as some mass exodus revolt against tax rates. Actual
50 dw9115 : Try using up to date data the data you are using is five years old in a different economy when guess what those states budgets had a lot more money i
51 Post contains images commavia : Then why are so many people leaving California, which has arguably the best weather of any state? Millions of people have been fleeing high-tax, anti
52 seabosdca : This is the most recent data compiled. Patterns of federal spending have not changed significantly in the last five years, and the distribution hasn'
53 caljn : Wow! Even quicker than I thought! I was expecting the "people are leaving California" retort tomorrow AM! Yes, people are leaving California, albeit
54 commavia : Over 1.5 million people since 2000. I'd call that fairly significant. Right, because nobody under the age of 65 is seeking a lower cost of living. No
55 Av8tor : Maybe everyone left because it's a filthy disgusting place to live and work.
56 jfklganyc : According to your chart, much like NYC, more people are moving in than moving out. As a matter of fact, as the number of people leaving increased, the
57 commavia : Hardly. The big difference New York has going for them is diversity. Detroit's economic vitality was far less diversified and far more dependent on a
58 n318ea : Excellent response to the second ad hominem attack in this thread! Great book that provided an inside look at the Texas Air "acquisition" of Eastern.
59 AAJFKSJUBKLYN : AA's workforce in NY today...in 2010, is nearly equivalent to what it was when they left in back in the late 70's.............
60 huaiwei : Perhaps I have not made myself clear to laymen, but when I say "base an operation", it means an operational base, and in this sense, it means an avia
61 dw9115 : Well your a little wrong on that there is a little city that sits in Nebraska it's name Omaha and a lot of people are making money there.[Edited 2010
62 TXJim : Since OPNLGUY is no longer on this board, I'll have to make you the first on my RR list! I just deleted a series of responses as there is really no p
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Why Did Portuguese Charter Airlines Fail In 1990's posted Sun Oct 3 2004 13:17:35 by Capital146
Why Did Canadi>n Airlines Fail? posted Thu Apr 3 2003 19:21:23 by AWspicious
Why Did Colgan Leave LEB? posted Sat Aug 29 2009 08:20:20 by Boeing71234567
Why Did Airlines Buy The 777-200A? posted Fri Sep 21 2007 14:26:37 by LY777
Why Did NW#4781 DCA-IND Have To Leave Early On9/13 posted Thu Sep 13 2007 21:16:11 by IADLHR
Why Did Eastern Airlines Keep Flight 401? posted Sun Aug 19 2007 15:56:04 by AA787823
Why Did Etihad Leave Gatwick? posted Sat Aug 18 2007 14:17:09 by Airevents
Why Did Airlines Order The B 747-300? posted Wed Aug 1 2007 05:50:00 by United Airline
Why Did Alaska Airlines Drop Russian Service posted Mon Jun 11 2007 08:24:54 by Asqx01
Why Did American Airlines Stop GLA - ORD Service? posted Tue Dec 5 2006 13:28:23 by 8herveg