"No, I don't see any real relief coming from Barack Obama to the middle class. I think he is still on a very liberal agenda. He's mouthing some words which maybe will play in some states but his policies are devastating to New York," Rep. Peter King said.

Congressman King said one thing that would help taxpayers in our area is a cost of living adjustment on federal taxes that takes into account how expensive it is to live here.

"If he's serious about the middle class there should be an allocation or adjustment made for people living in a high-income area, high-expense area, high cost of living area," the Republican from Long Island said.

New Yorkers seem to agree.

"Who wouldn't like to have some extra help in a place that's really expensive?" asked Tom Falcone of Queens.

Hopwin:

Let's say you make $65,000 a year where I keep my weekend home.

Let's say you make $65,000 a year in Atlanta.

Who has a better quality of life?

Hopwin:

Let's say you make $65,000 a year where I keep my weekend home.

Let's say you make $65,000 a year in Atlanta.

Who has a better quality of life?

You are ignoring the bolded statement about incomes above.

My company does business in all states and we have a geographic modifier to take into account cost of living. Ohio is our base rate with a 1.0 factor, NYC is our highest with a 1.35 factor and I want to say GA is our lowest at .85. If the cost of living is high, wages are naturally higher to compensate so your analogy above is false.

You are ignoring the bolded statement about incomes above.

My company does business in all states and we have a geographic modifier to take into account cost of living. Ohio is our base rate with a 1.0 factor, NYC is our highest with a 1.35 factor and I want to say GA is our lowest at .85. If the cost of living is high, wages are naturally higher to compensate so your analogy above is false.

Hopwin:
Really? It's false? Based on what? They make better wages? Too bad your anecdote disproves your theory, since the cost of living in NYC generally exceeds 135% of Cleveland, Ohio. And the wage differential doesn't account for taxation differences and increases at local, state, and federal level, because they are tied to gross income, not the living costs associated with where ever that job happens to be.

DS:
I thought it was pretty common knowledge that my weekend home is in a rural town with less than 20,000 people.

Yes Khross, it is false. Unless you are seriously going to try to say people in NYC & San Diego don't have a higher wage than those in Missouri, Kentucky and Idaho? If you are going to try I am sure I can locate some tax tables for you... While wages may not perfectly offset the higher cost of living you are ignoring the opportunity gains you have by living in such an area (or if you prefer the opportunity costs you pay for living in the mid-west).

You are also ignoring the obvious fact that high-income, high-expense areas = rich neighborhoods.

What opportunity gains and losses are you referring to?

I would like to know as well. There seems to be a sentiment pervading those who live on the coasts that the middle of the country is some sort of **** wasteland. The opportunity to experience a more diverse culture, as unassimilated, "FOB" immigrants tend to congregate in either Southern Cal, Miami or the Tri-state area. Perhaps that's what he means.

I would say the opportunity costs paying nearly several times in property prices and other expenses associated with living on either coast far dominates any perceived benefits.

Hopwin:

Really? It's false? Based on what? They make better wages? Too bad your anecdote disproves your theory, since the cost of living in NYC generally exceeds 135% of Cleveland, Ohio. And the wage differential doesn't account for taxation differences and increases at local, state, and federal level, because they are tied to gross income, not the living costs associated with where ever that job happens to be.

DS:

I thought it was pretty common knowledge that my weekend home is in a rural town with less than 20,000 people.

Do many people not relocate where their job takes them? It may be that once people's career develop to a certain point, that they moved to NYC from other places. It would be a fallacy, therefore, to assume that their career developed solely based on being located in NYC from the start.

My company does business in all states and we have a geographic modifier to take into account cost of living. Ohio is our base rate with a 1.0 factor, NYC is our highest with a 1.35 factor and I want to say GA is our lowest at .85. If the cost of living is high, wages are naturally higher to compensate so your analogy above is false.

In fact, if a higher percentage of people living there relocated specifically for their careers, it seems to downplay other aspects for moving there which could be taken to imply that there are very few other merits for living there other than one's career.