Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Vermont will cover $10K of expenses for people who move there and work remotely

work.qz.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 196 posts

Re: Vermont will cover $10K of expenses for people who move there and work remotely

#111

Post by dsfyu404ed »

ErikAugust wrote: post #95
dsfyu404ed wrote: post #69

People seem to be taking for granted that this is a good thing. In the short term of course attracting highly paid people is a good thing. In the longer term it's only a benefit if you're the kind of person who looks at Boston and thinks it's a good, highly functional society. Most of northern new England looks at Boston/MA and sees high cost of living, government that micromanages individuals and lots of crime. Havi…

Vermont won't be like Boston because of a dozen remote workers. The University does much more to "Jersey" or "Masshole" Vermont, and that doesn't even do much.

>The University does much more to "Jersey" or "Masshole" Vermont, and that doesn't even do much.

Agreed about the impact of 30 people being negligible (and some of them will probably be people who are from VT and want to move back but need a little extra incentive to kick off the process)

That said, the fact that they're looking to import talent instead of retain local talent is what annoys me. There's plenty of STEM grads who don't want to leave northern New England but feel forced to in order to make money.

Re: Vermont will cover $10K of expenses for people who move there and work remotely

#112

Post by kerkeslager »

rhcom2 wrote: post #101
swebs wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And yet the neighboring state of New Hampshire, which has some of the lowest taxes in the country (0% sales tax, 0% state income tax), beats Vermont handily in SAT scores. https://blog.prepscholar.com/average-sat-and-act-scores-by-s... What does Vermont have to show for its higher spending? Why do you see higher spending as an automatically good thing if it doesn't have any evidence of having a beneficial effect?

Possibly because until recently NH had all high schoolers take the SATs to be used in statewide assessments. It would follow teachers would then spend classroom time preparing their students for it.

When a metric becomes the target, it becomes subject to manipulation and the metric becomes no longer useful.

Re: Vermont will cover $10K of expenses for people who move there and work remotely

#113

Post by MikeGalt »

jimhefferon wrote: post #53
jackhack wrote: post #19

For many, this won't even begin to offset the increase in income and property taxes from this notoriously high-tax state. Individual or business, you're likely to pay more. http://money.cnn.com/gallery/smallbusiness/2012/10/15/state-... >>The income tax has a top rate of 8.95%. This ranks as the sixth-highest in the U.S., although it only applies to taxpayers making over $413,350 per year. Meanwhile, total state and…

> notoriously high-tax state Some societies think that it is wise to spend on some things such as education (see https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/local/wp/2015/06/02/the-... ). Others think that lowering taxes at whatever cost is better. The former fits with my thinking, which is why I like it here.

Just spending money on education is meaningless unless it is used wisely. This is a common political tactic to talk about how much a politician authorized or increased spending on a program that is important to his or her constituents but it says nothing about the results. President Obama started the military down the path toward "smarter, not more expensive" weapons programs. That thinking should be expanded into everything.

Re: Vermont will cover $10K of expenses for people who move there and work remotely

#114

Post by kerkeslager »

jackhack wrote: post #19

For many, this won't even begin to offset the increase in income and property taxes from this notoriously high-tax state. Individual or business, you're likely to pay more. http://money.cnn.com/gallery/smallbusiness/2012/10/15/state-... >>The income tax has a top rate of 8.95%. This ranks as the sixth-highest in the U.S., although it only applies to taxpayers making over $413,350 per year. Meanwhile, total state and…

Okay, but unlike the average denizen of HN, there are plenty of people who make decisions based on things other than money.

Re: Vermont will cover $10K of expenses for people who move there and work remotely

#115

Post by tclancy »

swebs wrote: post #91
jimhefferon wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> notoriously high-tax state Some societies think that it is wise to spend on some things such as education (see https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/local/wp/2015/06/02/the-... ). Others think that lowering taxes at whatever cost is better. The former fits with my thinking, which is why I like it here.

And yet the neighboring state of New Hampshire, which has some of the lowest taxes in the country (0% sales tax, 0% state income tax), beats Vermont handily in SAT scores. https://blog.prepscholar.com/average-sat-and-act-scores-by-s... What does Vermont have to show for its higher spending? Why do you see higher spending as an automatically good thing if it doesn't have any evidence of having a beneficial effect?

I would be very careful about touting NH's approach. We fund schools entirely on property taxes, so rich towns have good schools and poor towns do not. I'd guess part of the disparity is that in NH's poorer towns kids aren't even taking the SATs.

Not paying taxes is cool but the annual discussion of "Which completely normal public service will we forgo or curtail this year?" isn't so awesome.

Re: Vermont will cover $10K of expenses for people who move there and work remotely

#117

Post by jtsnow »

ChuckMcM wrote: post #17
unit91 wrote: post #6

From the law: > (3) The Agency shall award grants under the Program on a first-come, first-served basis, subject to available funding, as follows: (A) not more than $125,000.00 in calendar year 2019... With such a small budget, it seems like the actual intent may have been to allocate up to $125K to generate advertising about their state. https://legislature.vermont.gov/assets/Documents/2018/Docs/B...

As we are talking about living and working in Vermont on a technology focused news aggregation site, I would call that a success. Part of the reasoning given in the article is to shore up the "rapidly sinking tax base" of the state and it reminds me that we don't have a good example of governments that both grow and shrink based on the economic activity of the state. That is something that could really help areas rem…

Yes, the Strong Towns organization has a unique perspective on this. They make a convincing argument that local governments in the U.S. are trapped in a "growth Ponzi scheme." [1] Without continuous growth, most of them will never cover their liabilities. Strong Towns also provides interesting insights on how to avoid and correct this pattern.

[1] https://www.strongtowns.org/the-growth-ponzi-scheme/

Re: Vermont will cover $10K of expenses for people who move there and work remotely

#118

Post by sudosteph »

beauzero wrote: post #39
rpoconn1 wrote: post #24

Looks up tax rates for Vermont No thanks.

If you are looking for warmer I would suggest Carrollton, GA, Montgomery, AL or Chattanooga, TN. AL has the second lowest property taxes in the USA and while not 2015 Detroit cheap it does have 2018 Detroit cheap housing prices.

I've heard good things about Chattanooga due to their municipal gigabit, have been meaning to check it out.

I was really surprised by how nice AL was too last time I drove through it. All that said, if I go back south, it will be hard to not pick NC. Asheville doesn't have much industry for tech, but it's exactly the kind of culture (hippies, artists, bluegrass, great food) and weather I've been missing. Cost of living is high by NC standards, but not for remote workers. Definitely more appealing than Vermont for most folks who don't need to be near Boston or NYC.

Re: Vermont will cover $10K of expenses for people who move there and work remotely

#119

Post by pwthornton »

Liquix wrote: post #35
jackhack wrote: post #19

For many, this won't even begin to offset the increase in income and property taxes from this notoriously high-tax state. Individual or business, you're likely to pay more. http://money.cnn.com/gallery/smallbusiness/2012/10/15/state-... >>The income tax has a top rate of 8.95%. This ranks as the sixth-highest in the U.S., although it only applies to taxpayers making over $413,350 per year. Meanwhile, total state and…

On top of the taxes, housing is pretty bad too. You can be a reclusive hermit in southern / central VT on the cheap, but the closer you get to Burlington / Essex Jct the more expensive it gets. This is in part caused by the size of the University of Vermont - high demand for housing, small area. Many buildings have too many units crammed into them for the same reason. Not nearly as bad as the valley, but another reas…

This is one of the issues that this plan will run up into.

Normally someone may work remotely in a more rural place for cheap housing, but some of the housing in Vermont isn't that cheap.

Burlington has some of the same housing issues that other cities in the county have. I would imagine the vast majority of people who would consider doing this plan would want to live near Burlington. Well, that means Burlington would need to address housing supply and affordability too.

Re: Vermont will cover $10K of expenses for people who move there and work remotely

#120

Post by s73v3r_ »

intrasight wrote: post #72
ChuckMcM wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As we are talking about living and working in Vermont on a technology focused news aggregation site, I would call that a success. Part of the reasoning given in the article is to shore up the "rapidly sinking tax base" of the state and it reminds me that we don't have a good example of governments that both grow and shrink based on the economic activity of the state. That is something that could really help areas rem…

US governments aren't very good at this - because they don't bank the good times. How many US governments have "Sovereign wealth funds"?

I can guarantee you that states that did would be hammered by anti-tax people thinking that they were overtaxed.
Post reply on HN