Leftover Metrocard Change Infuriates Some
UPDATE: City To Remove 14 Blocks Of Bike Lanes On Bedford Ave.
Hamster Rides The 4 Train
Bouncer Beatdown at Jay-Z's 40/40 Club
2nd Avenue Subway Cooling System Will "Blight" UES
The State Senate is still mulling over gay marriage legislation—maybe NYC Comptroller Bill Thompson's report showing that NY State "could gain over $200 million in the three years immediately following the legalization of marriage for same-sex couples" will help the senators make up their mind. The report is an update of his 2007 study, Love Counts: The Economic Benefits of Marriage Equality for New York. If the recession doesn't reduce the number of out-of-state guest, NY State could expect a $210 million gay marriage boom ($178 million is the recession is a factor) while NYC would expect $149 million ($120 million if the recession affects guest count). There would be higher insurance costs—$69 million, $37 million paid by employers. Thompson said, "Legalizing marriage for same-sex couples is not only good for the couples, but also for our economy. And while other states across our nation have legalized marriage for same-sex couples since my last report, I expect New York to still stand as a prime destination for many couples because it will stand as a welcoming beacon of diversity and acceptance." He is also "disappointed" the California Supreme Court upheld Prop 8.
NYC Comptroller: Gay Marriage Good For Economy
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebookComments (12) [rss]
Post a comment (Comment Policy)
Tips
Newsmap
Contribute
head to http://www.newyorkequality.com to contact your State Senator and make sure we get this revenue for New York!
and tell your friends and family across the state as well
Great report. And by great I mean infuriating.
A.) This money apparently will just materialize out of the ether as a thank you from the gay spirits for allowing gays to marry. This report provides no legitimate sources for the money, just that it's somehow going to come here. Maybe, just maybe, the city's top accountant should do a better job of explaining than that.
B.) He doesn't mention any of the potential negatives, and I see one huge one: More and more small businesse are already wrestling with the choice of laying people off, folding outright, or cutting health insurance. This problem will be exacerbated if the state mandates they increase their insurance expenses, and more people will be uninsured.
I am not against gay marriage, but the state needs to examine the consequences that will be experienced by society as a whole, not just the key beneficiaries, before they do it.
While I agree with the potential negative of health insurance, I take huge issue with point (A).
Getting married costs money. Even if all you do is run over to NY from another state, you still have to be in the state for at least one day (I think) before you can actually be married. That means you have to stay at a hotel, buy food, and entertain yourself for at least one day. That money is spent in NY. That isn't even to mention the fact that there could be plenty of couples who come to NY and have huge, lavish weddings. All that money is also spent in NY.
No, money won't just fall from the sky down to New York as a gift for making same-sex marriages legal, but it will-like it or not-generate money for New York State.
I don't dispute that it will bring in money, I just would like to know if he used some kind of methodology to arrive at these figures or if he just made them up.
So your argument (B) is that we should continue with the state-sanctioned discrimination because it's good for business?
I don't know the source of A, but it is probably based on California.
As for B, that is really a stupid argument. For one, the problem you highlight is with the health care system, not with gay marriage. Second, we're really talking about a very small amount of people. There were 18,000 couples married in California, and that was knowing there was a very good chance gay marriage would be taken away. You could probably find an anecdote or two about a business cutting benefits because of gay marriage, but as a societal issue, it just isn't there.
Okay, so queers are going to rack up health care costs for small businesses by getting married? Why not take the logical next step and allow business to refuse to extend health care coverage to hetero families.
Those family plans can really add up. If mom and dad want coverage, they'll both have to find jobs that provide health care benefits. The kids, well, the kids will have to look both ways before crossing the street.
I don't think that economic benefit should be a factor in determining social policy. Social policy should be made based on principles
Good for Bill Thompson! I would have voted for anyone against Bloomberg, but this makes me actually want to vote for him! How rewarding would it be this year getting both the gay marriage, and be rid of Bloomberg?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V_71dMKDD7M
Money over Values ?
Am I not surprised, the government will take money and will smile as men kiss in front of the clerk who marries them.
It is good business practice ! ?
Well I guess if it is good for business, then we should all just end up in hell then....