Vicky writes: > As David correctly points out, Minneapolis is even RICHER NOW.
This is not what I said. I noted that using Census figures, Minneapolis has a smaller share of the state's population than she claimed. I said nothing about richness, or lack thereof. As Terrell Brown pointed out, Minneapolis AND St. Paul have 25 percent of the METRO AREA'S commercial-industrial base...making it very unlikely that Minneapolis alone has 22 percent of the state's taxable wealth, as Vicky claimed. > Our proportionate population has declined to 7.8%, while the MARKET VALUE > of our real estate has GROWN TO $22 BILLION! This, as my friend Dave used to say, is a nothing-burger. Real estate generally increases in value no matter your population. Vicky's original point was that Minneapolis's taxable wealth is a far greater share of state totals than our slice of the population (she claimed double). She has not proven that point with accurate statistics yet, as others such as Terrell have demonstrated. And even if we DO have a higher share of the taxable wealth than people (which I'm not conceding) that doesn't measure "need" - the number of poor, older infrastructure, regional amenities than non-residents use but don't pay for - that are a key, legitimate factor behind Local Government Aid. David Brauer King Field TEMPORARY REMINDER: 1. Send all posts in plain-text format. 2. Cut as much of the post you're responding to as possible. ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
