Toyota moving to Texas

[panda]

That is why Texas off the charts. The largest demographic inflow to Dallas/Fort Worth, Houston, and Austin are Californians. The population growth is unmatched by any other states combined with 0% state income, good schools, and business friendly environment is making Texas a popular destination for Californians.

 

[peppy]

Not as easy as that. There is more at play than just taxes. For example, I believe Tesla's deciding factor to move next door was fear of litigation.

Just imagine if California cut the tax rate, there will be more companies that will come back to California. Real estate will be off the charts.

California Politicians don't know and understand business.

 

[Irvinecommuter]

Not as easy as that. There is more at play than just taxes. For example, I believe Tesla's deciding factor to move next door was fear of litigation.

Just imagine if California cut the tax rate, there will be more companies that will come back to California. Real estate will be off the charts.

California Politicians don't know and understand business.

It was a lot of things...cheap labor, lower housing costs, no income tax, huge tax incentive, more work force.

 

[Irvinecommuter]

That is why Texas off the charts. The largest demographic inflow to Dallas/Fort Worth, Houston, and Austin are Californians. The population growth is unmatched by any other states combined with 0% state income, good schools, and business friendly environment is making Texas a popular destination for Californians.

Texas' economy is in a freefall thanks for the drop in oil prices...their schools are not good.  There are a lot very good private schools but their public school system is not very good.
http://www.texasobserver.org/everything-need-know-texas-school-finance-ruling/

And finally, it's Texas.

 

[Irvinecommuter]

Just imagine if California cut the tax rate, there will be more companies that will come back to California. Real estate will be off the charts.

California Politicians don't know and understand business.

Real estate price is one of the major reason why businesses are leaving...they cannot find an affordable work force.  California is a victim of its own success.

Those moving to California tend to have higher incomes. About 35% of working-age people moving in make more than $50,000 annually, compared with 27% of those moving out.

The disparity gets progressively pronounced at the lower end of the income scale.

For those making $40,000 to $49,999, for instance, the net loss of population is 15,403 residents since 2007. The loss is 22,754 residents in the $30,000 to $39,999 range, then more than doubles to 46,318 residents in the $20,000 to $29,999 range.

"Housing prices are a primary factor, because that's usually the first thing you deal with when you're moving," said Dowell Myers, a professor of demography and urban planning at USC.

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-california-migration-20150101-story.html

 

[panda]

I wanted to ask you guys a hypothetical question. If you were forced to move out of California and you can work your job anywhere with a WI-FI access. Which city and state would you choose and why? Would Dallas/Fort Worth be your first choice?

 

[Irvinecommuter]

I wanted to ask you guys a hypothetical question. If you were forced to move out of California and you can work your job anywhere with a WI-FI access. Which city and state would you choose and why? Would Dallas/Fort Worth be your first choice?

No...Portland would be no. 1, Seattle would be no. 2, and Vegas would be 3.

 

[panda]

Seattle and Vegas are both 0% state income states. Thanks for your top 3 list.. What are your reasons why you have selected these three cities?

I wanted to ask you guys a hypothetical question. If you were forced to move out of California and you can work your job anywhere with a WI-FI access. Which city and state would you choose and why? Would Dallas/Fort Worth be your first choice?

No...Portland would be no. 1, Seattle would be no. 2, and Vegas would be 3.

 

[Irvinecommuter]

Seattle and Vegas are both 0% state income states. Thanks for your top 3 list.. What are your reasons why you have selected these three cities?

I wanted to ask you guys a hypothetical question. If you were forced to move out of California and you can work your job anywhere with a WI-FI access. Which city and state would you choose and why? Would Dallas/Fort Worth be your first choice?

No...Portland would be no. 1, Seattle would be no. 2, and Vegas would be 3.

Actually...Portland would be a 0% income tax state.  Pretty much mix of the population and decent weather. 

These are distant choice however.  Oregon has terrible school systems and not great on jobs.  Seattle is just as expensive as California but not as good schools and as diverse.

Vegas is nice in that it is close to Southern California and good diversity but the weather is not great.  Also, not very diverse job field and not so good schools.

 

[eyephone]

Cost of living is one of the reason why companies are leaving.
Here are other reasons:
income state tax, regulations, subsidies given by other states, ...

Just imagine if California cut the tax rate, there will be more companies that will come back to California. Real estate will be off the charts.

California Politicians don't know and understand business.

Real estate price is one of the major reason why businesses are leaving...they cannot find an affordable work force.  California is a victim of its own success.

Those moving to California tend to have higher incomes. About 35% of working-age people moving in make more than $50,000 annually, compared with 27% of those moving out.

The disparity gets progressively pronounced at the lower end of the income scale.

For those making $40,000 to $49,999, for instance, the net loss of population is 15,403 residents since 2007. The loss is 22,754 residents in the $30,000 to $39,999 range, then more than doubles to 46,318 residents in the $20,000 to $29,999 range.

"Housing prices are a primary factor, because that's usually the first thing you deal with when you're moving," said Dowell Myers, a professor of demography and urban planning at USC.

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-california-migration-20150101-story.html

 

[irvinehomeowner]

And finally, it's Texas.

And hot as heck... like Georgia.

Like IC mentions, there is way more in play than just income taxes, lower housing prices, etc etc. Quality of life is not measured just by how much things cost.

All I know is I can play outdoor basketball almost anytime of the year in Irvine.

My top 3 get out of Cali locations are similar to IC's... except for Vegas... I have to stay near the ocean.

 

[morekaos]

Not as easy as that. There is more at play than just taxes. For example, I believe Tesla's deciding factor to move next door was fear of litigation.

Just imagine if California cut the tax rate, there will be more companies that will come back to California. Real estate will be off the charts.

California Politicians don't know and understand business.

It was a lot of things...cheap labor, lower housing costs, no income tax, huge tax incentive, more work force.

Believe me, regulatory environment was one of the major reasons.  Building that plant in this state would be a red tape nightmare, very close to an impossibility. 
Ask Moonbeam Brown how his bullet train is coming along.  Tesla ran for the border in order to get it done.

 

[Irvinecommuter]

Not as easy as that. There is more at play than just taxes. For example, I believe Tesla's deciding factor to move next door was fear of litigation.

Just imagine if California cut the tax rate, there will be more companies that will come back to California. Real estate will be off the charts.

California Politicians don't know and understand business.

It was a lot of things...cheap labor, lower housing costs, no income tax, huge tax incentive, more work force.

Believe me, regulatory environment was one of the major reasons.  Building that plant in this state would be a red tape nightmare, very close to an impossibility.  Tesla ran for the border on order to get it done.

They could have gone to a number of states...California was never a serious candidate.

In a conference call last week, Musk said Tesla would break ground at its first site next month, then follow up at a second site a month or two later. He said the Brown administration is working hard to accommodate Tesla, and he called California an ?improbable, but not impossible? contender.

Arizona, Nevada and New Mexico remain contenders, but the prospect of Texas and California going head-to-head would continue the red state vs. blue state narrative that Gov. Rick Perry loves so much.

Some analysts question whether California is truly a contender or whether Musk is trying to appease officials in a state where he will still build cars, rockets and solar panels at his various businesses no matter where the battery plant is located.

http://www.post-gazette.com/powerso...n-to-Texas-vs-California/stories/201405120156

Point is that Nevada needed Tesla a lot more than California did. 

Also...not always as simple as it seems:

Losers:

Insurance companies: For more than 40 years, insurance companies that have their home office in Nevada have received tax credits that cost Nevada about $27 million a year. That program would go away and the money diverted to fund tax credits for Tesla. That's a $27 million tax increase for those insurance companies.

Film productions: In a hard fought battle at the Legislature, the film industry succeeded in passing a four-year $80 million film tax incentive program. If the Tesla deal goes through, that incentive program will be slashed to $10 million.

Car Dealerships: In other states, car dealerships have lobbied hard for laws to prevent Tesla from selling directly to the consumer in manufacturer-owned stores. Under this package, the Nevada Legislature would pass a new law giving electric car manufacturers the explicit right to sell directly to the consumer without going through a dealer franchise.

http://www.rgj.com/story/news/2014/09/04/nevada-strikes-billion-tax-break-deal-tesla/15096777/

 

[panda]

IHO, actually the recent summers here in Georgia haven't been that bad. The heat here is nowhere near that of Vegas, Dallas, or Phoenix. I don't think we got any snow this winter and actually we had one of the warmest unusual winter weather here. I remember our last Christmas eve weather was in the high 70s here in Atlanta. I don't know if you want to call it global warming.

And finally, it's Texas.

And hot as heck... like Georgia.

Like IC mentions, there is way more in play than just income taxes, lower housing prices, etc etc. Quality of life is not measured just by how much things cost.

All I know is I can play outdoor basketball almost anytime of the year in Irvine.

My top 3 get out of Cali locations are similar to IC's... except for Vegas... I have to stay near the ocean.

 

[morekaos]

Not as easy as that. There is more at play than just taxes. For example, I believe Tesla's deciding factor to move next door was fear of litigation.

Just imagine if California cut the tax rate, there will be more companies that will come back to California. Real estate will be off the charts.

California Politicians don't know and understand business.

It was a lot of things...cheap labor, lower housing costs, no income tax, huge tax incentive, more work force.

Believe me, regulatory environment was one of the major reasons.  Building that plant in this state would be a red tape nightmare, very close to an impossibility.  Tesla ran for the border on order to get it done.

They could have gone to a number of states...California was never a serious candidate.

In a conference call last week, Musk said Tesla would break ground at its first site next month, then follow up at a second site a month or two later. He said the Brown administration is working hard to accommodate Tesla, and he called California an ?improbable, but not impossible? contender.

Arizona, Nevada and New Mexico remain contenders, but the prospect of Texas and California going head-to-head would continue the red state vs. blue state narrative that Gov. Rick Perry loves so much.

Some analysts question whether California is truly a contender or whether Musk is trying to appease officials in a state where he will still build cars, rockets and solar panels at his various businesses no matter where the battery plant is located.

http://www.post-gazette.com/powerso...n-to-Texas-vs-California/stories/201405120156

Point is that Nevada needed Tesla a lot more than California did. 

Also...not always as simple as it seems:

Losers:

Insurance companies: For more than 40 years, insurance companies that have their home office in Nevada have received tax credits that cost Nevada about $27 million a year. That program would go away and the money diverted to fund tax credits for Tesla. That's a $27 million tax increase for those insurance companies.

Film productions: In a hard fought battle at the Legislature, the film industry succeeded in passing a four-year $80 million film tax incentive program. If the Tesla deal goes through, that incentive program will be slashed to $10 million.

Car Dealerships: In other states, car dealerships have lobbied hard for laws to prevent Tesla from selling directly to the consumer in manufacturer-owned stores. Under this package, the Nevada Legislature would pass a new law giving electric car manufacturers the explicit right to sell directly to the consumer without going through a dealer franchise.

http://www.rgj.com/story/news/2014/09/04/nevada-strikes-billion-tax-break-deal-tesla/15096777/

The point is California lost again...we have to start winning again

 

[Irvinecommuter]

Not as easy as that. There is more at play than just taxes. For example, I believe Tesla's deciding factor to move next door was fear of litigation.

Just imagine if California cut the tax rate, there will be more companies that will come back to California. Real estate will be off the charts.

California Politicians don't know and understand business.

It was a lot of things...cheap labor, lower housing costs, no income tax, huge tax incentive, more work force.

Believe me, regulatory environment was one of the major reasons.  Building that plant in this state would be a red tape nightmare, very close to an impossibility.  Tesla ran for the border on order to get it done.

They could have gone to a number of states...California was never a serious candidate.

In a conference call last week, Musk said Tesla would break ground at its first site next month, then follow up at a second site a month or two later. He said the Brown administration is working hard to accommodate Tesla, and he called California an ?improbable, but not impossible? contender.

Arizona, Nevada and New Mexico remain contenders, but the prospect of Texas and California going head-to-head would continue the red state vs. blue state narrative that Gov. Rick Perry loves so much.

Some analysts question whether California is truly a contender or whether Musk is trying to appease officials in a state where he will still build cars, rockets and solar panels at his various businesses no matter where the battery plant is located.

http://www.post-gazette.com/powerso...n-to-Texas-vs-California/stories/201405120156

Point is that Nevada needed Tesla a lot more than California did. 

Also...not always as simple as it seems:

Losers:

Insurance companies: For more than 40 years, insurance companies that have their home office in Nevada have received tax credits that cost Nevada about $27 million a year. That program would go away and the money diverted to fund tax credits for Tesla. That's a $27 million tax increase for those insurance companies.

Film productions: In a hard fought battle at the Legislature, the film industry succeeded in passing a four-year $80 million film tax incentive program. If the Tesla deal goes through, that incentive program will be slashed to $10 million.

Car Dealerships: In other states, car dealerships have lobbied hard for laws to prevent Tesla from selling directly to the consumer in manufacturer-owned stores. Under this package, the Nevada Legislature would pass a new law giving electric car manufacturers the explicit right to sell directly to the consumer without going through a dealer franchise.

http://www.rgj.com/story/news/2014/09/04/nevada-strikes-billion-tax-break-deal-tesla/15096777/

The point is California lost again...we have to start winning again

What are you Trump?  California has been winning.

 

[eyephone]

Not as easy as that. There is more at play than just taxes. For example, I believe Tesla's deciding factor to move next door was fear of litigation.

Just imagine if California cut the tax rate, there will be more companies that will come back to California. Real estate will be off the charts.

California Politicians don't know and understand business.

It was a lot of things...cheap labor, lower housing costs, no income tax, huge tax incentive, more work force.

Believe me, regulatory environment was one of the major reasons.  Building that plant in this state would be a red tape nightmare, very close to an impossibility.  Tesla ran for the border on order to get it done.

They could have gone to a number of states...California was never a serious candidate.

In a conference call last week, Musk said Tesla would break ground at its first site next month, then follow up at a second site a month or two later. He said the Brown administration is working hard to accommodate Tesla, and he called California an ?improbable, but not impossible? contender.

Arizona, Nevada and New Mexico remain contenders, but the prospect of Texas and California going head-to-head would continue the red state vs. blue state narrative that Gov. Rick Perry loves so much.

Some analysts question whether California is truly a contender or whether Musk is trying to appease officials in a state where he will still build cars, rockets and solar panels at his various businesses no matter where the battery plant is located.

http://www.post-gazette.com/powerso...n-to-Texas-vs-California/stories/201405120156

Point is that Nevada needed Tesla a lot more than California did. 

Also...not always as simple as it seems:

Losers:

Insurance companies: For more than 40 years, insurance companies that have their home office in Nevada have received tax credits that cost Nevada about $27 million a year. That program would go away and the money diverted to fund tax credits for Tesla. That's a $27 million tax increase for those insurance companies.

Film productions: In a hard fought battle at the Legislature, the film industry succeeded in passing a four-year $80 million film tax incentive program. If the Tesla deal goes through, that incentive program will be slashed to $10 million.

Car Dealerships: In other states, car dealerships have lobbied hard for laws to prevent Tesla from selling directly to the consumer in manufacturer-owned stores. Under this package, the Nevada Legislature would pass a new law giving electric car manufacturers the explicit right to sell directly to the consumer without going through a dealer franchise.

http://www.rgj.com/story/news/2014/09/04/nevada-strikes-billion-tax-break-deal-tesla/15096777/

The point is California lost again...we have to start winning again

We pay high taxes to fund the social programs in California.
The high speed train is a joke.

 

[riznick]

You can get used to the heat in those hot places.  It would get well over 120 outside where I lived and I can't remember a day where I didn't play ball outdoors.  We would even play with high winds, so...  yeah.

Texas' economy is in a freefall thanks for the drop in oil prices...their schools are not good.  There are a lot very good private schools but their public school system is not very good.
http://www.texasobserver.org/everything-need-know-texas-school-finance-ruling/

California schools aren't so great.  Irvine is great, but the rest of the state is spotty.  I'm sure the same can be said with other areas in the country.

 

[eyephone]

Not as easy as that. There is more at play than just taxes. For example, I believe Tesla's deciding factor to move next door was fear of litigation.

Just imagine if California cut the tax rate, there will be more companies that will come back to California. Real estate will be off the charts.

California Politicians don't know and understand business.

It was a lot of things...cheap labor, lower housing costs, no income tax, huge tax incentive, more work force.

Believe me, regulatory environment was one of the major reasons.  Building that plant in this state would be a red tape nightmare, very close to an impossibility.  Tesla ran for the border on order to get it done.

They could have gone to a number of states...California was never a serious candidate.

In a conference call last week, Musk said Tesla would break ground at its first site next month, then follow up at a second site a month or two later. He said the Brown administration is working hard to accommodate Tesla, and he called California an ?improbable, but not impossible? contender.

Arizona, Nevada and New Mexico remain contenders, but the prospect of Texas and California going head-to-head would continue the red state vs. blue state narrative that Gov. Rick Perry loves so much.

Some analysts question whether California is truly a contender or whether Musk is trying to appease officials in a state where he will still build cars, rockets and solar panels at his various businesses no matter where the battery plant is located.

http://www.post-gazette.com/powerso...n-to-Texas-vs-California/stories/201405120156

Point is that Nevada needed Tesla a lot more than California did. 

Also...not always as simple as it seems:

Losers:

Insurance companies: For more than 40 years, insurance companies that have their home office in Nevada have received tax credits that cost Nevada about $27 million a year. That program would go away and the money diverted to fund tax credits for Tesla. That's a $27 million tax increase for those insurance companies.

Film productions: In a hard fought battle at the Legislature, the film industry succeeded in passing a four-year $80 million film tax incentive program. If the Tesla deal goes through, that incentive program will be slashed to $10 million.

Car Dealerships: In other states, car dealerships have lobbied hard for laws to prevent Tesla from selling directly to the consumer in manufacturer-owned stores. Under this package, the Nevada Legislature would pass a new law giving electric car manufacturers the explicit right to sell directly to the consumer without going through a dealer franchise.

http://www.rgj.com/story/news/2014/09/04/nevada-strikes-billion-tax-break-deal-tesla/15096777/

The point is California lost again...we have to start winning again

What are you Trump?  California has been winning.

How are we winning? We are in debt to our eyeballs. The state keeps on spending and spending. It's easy to spend money, like a corporate credit card. We need better leaders in our state.

 

[Irvinecommuter]

We pay high taxes to fund the social programs in California.
The high speed train is a joke.

Forward thinking is such a terrible thing...high speed train is awesome.