So what gives with 2000 Disney Californian employees being transferred to Florida?

[tiana1989]

So what makes all the (accurate) arguments about tax incentives interesting to me in the long term is how many Fortune 500 CEOs have decided it’s still not worth it. FL just lost out on the Apple expansion to North Carolina despite it costing Apple millions more to choose NC. Some of the papers here did a deep dive, and apparently FL has the among the lowest Fortune 500 companies out of all the big states, despite the tax incentives. Apparently Apple was concerned that because of FL’s politics, it wouldn’t be able to attract the talent it wants in its expansion because a lot of them will be young professionals with graduate degrees and disposable income just now starting young families with certain expectations for the school system, healthcare, etc. I’m not trying to start a political debate over whether people think that’s right or agree/disagree, but it is fascinating to me when certain politics that attract major CEOs are the same ones that will make it harder to hire certain employees, and how different companies have responded in different ways. 2000 positions, especially something specialized like Imagineering, is of course not the same as a whole new Apple campus, but it will definitely be interesting to watch to see if Disney gets this new campus staffed the way it wants to, with the people it wants. It’s just kind of a flip side to the reality that dollars go further in FL than CA.

 

[shawthorne44]

So what makes all the (accurate) arguments about tax incentives interesting to me in the long term is how many Fortune 500 CEOs have decided it’s still not worth it. FL just lost out on the Apple expansion to North Carolina despite it costing Apple millions more to choose NC. Some of the papers here did a deep dive, and apparently FL has the among the lowest Fortune 500 companies out of all the big states, despite the tax incentives. Apparently Apple was concerned that because of FL’s politics, it wouldn’t be able to attract the talent it wants in its expansion because a lot of them will be young professionals with graduate degrees and disposable income just now starting young families with certain expectations for the school system, healthcare, etc. I’m not trying to start a political debate over whether people think that’s right or agree/disagree, but it is fascinating to me when certain politics that attract major CEOs are the same ones that will make it harder to hire certain employees, and how different companies have responded in different ways. 2000 positions, especially something specialized like Imagineering, is of course not the same as a whole new Apple campus, but it will definitely be interesting to watch to see if Disney gets this new campus staffed the way it wants to, with the people it wants. It’s just kind of a flip side to the reality that dollars go further in FL than CA.

There are predictions and then there are what actually happens. Look at Coinbase where the predictions that were that their No Politics stance would severely hurt them. Actual result was that they didn't miss the few that left over it, and they were able to recruit high-quality candidates they couldn't have gotten if the workplace were politically charged.

 

[matt and beth]

So what makes all the (accurate) arguments about tax incentives interesting to me in the long term is how many Fortune 500 CEOs have decided it’s still not worth it. FL just lost out on the Apple expansion to North Carolina despite it costing Apple millions more to choose NC. Some of the papers here did a deep dive, and apparently FL has the among the lowest Fortune 500 companies out of all the big states, despite the tax incentives. Apparently Apple was concerned that because of FL’s politics, it wouldn’t be able to attract the talent it wants in its expansion because a lot of them will be young professionals with graduate degrees and disposable income just now starting young families with certain expectations for the school system, healthcare, etc. I’m not trying to start a political debate over whether people think that’s right or agree/disagree, but it is fascinating to me when certain politics that attract major CEOs are the same ones that will make it harder to hire certain employees, and how different companies have responded in different ways. 2000 positions, especially something specialized like Imagineering, is of course not the same as a whole new Apple campus, but it will definitely be interesting to watch to see if Disney gets this new campus staffed the way it wants to, with the people it wants. It’s just kind of a flip side to the reality that dollars go further in FL than CA.

Young professionals, with graduate degrees, starting families do not have disposable incomes. For the record.

 

[tiana1989]

The Apple starting pay salaries were in the 150 range. I meant before starting families, not before the diaper tax hits lol. If you’re in a 300k double income household in FL or NC, that gets you pretty far (not in CA, sadly). And re Coinbase, I’m not saying that it does or doesn’t happen/whether it’s right or wrong, but that CEOs make decisions based on these predictions so it’s always interesting to see how it plays out. Of course there’s no way of really knowing because they make their decisions and there’s no way of knowing how it could have played out, but Apple is just a recent decision of how the FL tax incentives weren’t enough. But again, I think that was much larger scale than Disney’s 2000 positions, and ultimately the ones losing out are the current employees who are getting screwed over by this decision. Seeing their stories online has been really heartbreaking.

 

[Lilsia]

Pretty sure what Florida misses in state income tax, they collect in property taxes. California does have decent property taxes.

So does Florida. Your property tax rate is only 1.2%. where I live, it's 2.3%. couple that with no State income tax, Florida looks pretty good.

 

[TinkAgainU]

So does Florida. Your property tax rate is only 1.2%. where I live, it's 2.3%. couple that with no State income tax, Florida looks pretty good.

Good to know. California State Tax (which is significantly lower than Federal) "Might or Might Not" still be lower than that 1% property tax difference - depending on your annual income and the value of the real estate you own... I saw a VERY rough rule of thumb showing that California withholds about 4.6% more from a paycheck at $50,000 (call if 5%), and if Florida takes 1.1% more in property taxes (call it 1%) you can see with a $50,000 net income, and a $250,000 home that is pretty much a wash. Where Florida REALLY shines is not the taxes - but the prices for housing. A home that is $250,000 in Orlando would be well over $500,000 (could easily be $700,000) in most of Southern California I think the hardest decision financially for these people is this - could Florida be a oneway trip? Once you step out of the housing inflation in California - it is hard to ever afford to move back. And the weather (which looks more similar on paper than it is) can be a challenge for some Southern Californians too.

 

[shawthorne44]

I think the hardest decision financially for these people is this - could Florida be a oneway trip? Once you step out of the housing inflation in California - it is hard to ever afford to move back. And the weather (which looks more similar on paper than it is) can be a challenge for some Southern Californians too.

I live in the Dallas area. High today is 71F with a low of 66F. My dad has a saying, "If the weather were any nicer, I couldn't afford to live here. " With California that is very much the amazing weather and amazing expense.

 

[jpeterson]

Young professionals, with graduate degrees, starting families do not have disposable incomes. For the record.

It just feels disposable because of how fast it goes away! Starting a family is expensive!

 

[Wiltony]

I thought much of this stemmed from the fall-out between Gov. Newsom and Bob Iger and how the State of CA kept DL closed for so long.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jackke...a-restrictions-exacerbated-pandemic-troubles/

That's a pretty horrific justification for this.

I really am not mugging you. I am offering you a choice. Only if you don't hand over your wallet are you being "shot". So in reality it's your decision to be shot.

This is often the nuance involved in arguments around religious free-agency. God supposedly gave people free-agency, but if they use that free agency for anything other than what god says, they're going to hell.

Join the military and see how many times you move during your career!

This is the worst kind of response on threads like these. "Your problems don't matter because someone else has it worse." (Pro-tip: someone else always has it worse, and it's cruel to try marginalize people's troubles by pointing this out.)

 

[juxtapose]

So what makes all the (accurate) arguments about tax incentives interesting to me in the long term is how many Fortune 500 CEOs have decided it’s still not worth it. FL just lost out on the Apple expansion to North Carolina despite it costing Apple millions more to choose NC. Some of the papers here did a deep dive, and apparently FL has the among the lowest Fortune 500 companies out of all the big states, despite the tax incentives. Apparently Apple was concerned that because of FL’s politics, it wouldn’t be able to attract the talent it wants in its expansion because a lot of them will be young professionals with graduate degrees and disposable income just now starting young families with certain expectations for the school system, healthcare, etc. I’m not trying to start a political debate over whether people think that’s right or agree/disagree, but it is fascinating to me when certain politics that attract major CEOs are the same ones that will make it harder to hire certain employees, and how different companies have responded in different ways. 2000 positions, especially something specialized like Imagineering, is of course not the same as a whole new Apple campus, but it will definitely be interesting to watch to see if Disney gets this new campus staffed the way it wants to, with the people it wants. It’s just kind of a flip side to the reality that dollars go further in FL than CA.

A lot of this is true in my circle of 30 year old married couples in the tech industry. We seem to gravitate to larger cities with more liberal circles but still cheaper (cheaper than CA, not actually cheap) cost of living (think Denver, Atlanta, Oregon, Seattle).

I do find it interesting is as you bring in more younger people, they vote more liberal, and demand better services, and thus taxes increase to pay for these services like schools, parks, bike lanes, etc. The people arriving also drives up housing costs (see Colorado right now, just happens to be where we live so I have seen it over the last 1-2 decades). So while FL or CO or wherever might be cheaper than CA for now, it probably won't always be.

 

[sarac87]

A lot of this is true in my circle of 30 year old married couples in the tech industry. We seem to gravitate to larger cities with more liberal circles but still cheaper (cheaper than CA, not actually cheap) cost of living (think Denver, Atlanta, Oregon, Seattle).

I concur. People in tech are rarely looking for forever jobs. There is little incentive to stay with the same company throughout your entire career anymore. People in tech are looking for job hubs, where there is always a new opportunity around the corner. Southern California has the entertainment industry, with a lot of opportunities for special effects and art design, which goes hand in hand with Imagineering. It also has a large tech presence across other industries. A move to Florida means you'll be bouncing between Disney and Universal, or you will only live there for a few years before moving to a place with a wider range of job opportunities to settle down.

 

[middlechild]

Southern California has the entertainment industry, with a lot of opportunities for special effects and art design, which goes hand in hand with Imagineering.

Central Florida now has an entertainment industry because of Imagineering. Covid restrictions on employee office space has clearly shown the need to be in proximity is overrated as an impact on productivity, due in large part to improvements in networking and sharing. Sure, the 20 somethings may not be surrounding the property yet (UCF anyone?) but there are many 30 to 60 year olds glad to move regions. The loss of some due to the move provides an advancement opportunity to the many.

 

[GreatLakes]

I think the decision comes down to two things. The first is cost and the second is proximity. If I were running Disney I would want my Imagineers closer to the larger property which is in FL. It is as simple as that. The cost savings would just be an added bonus. Personally I wouldn't want to live in CA ever and while I did live in FL and wasn't impressed I'd take it in a minute over CA.

 

[juxtapose]

I think the decision comes down to two things. The first is cost and the second is proximity. If I were running Disney I would want my Imagineers closer to the larger property which is in FL. It is as simple as that. The cost savings would just be an added bonus. Personally I wouldn't want to live in CA ever and while I did live in FL and wasn't impressed I'd take it in a minute over CA.

I agree being close to WDW is nice but I imagine if you took a poll of most people in the art/entertainment/tech industry more would choose CA over FL, that's just the kind of people who get into those fields. My husband worked tech for a FL company remotely for several years because they couldn't get anyone qualified to move to FL to do the job (he does a tech job where almost no one over 40 does it). When he quit, they once again had to find a remote person to replace him.

 

[TiggerBouncy]

I agree being close to WDW is nice but I imagine if you took a poll of most people in the art/entertainment/tech industry more would choose CA over FL, that's just the kind of people who get into those fields. My husband worked tech for a FL company remotely for several years because they couldn't get anyone qualified to move to FL to do the job (he does a tech job where almost no one over 40 does it). When he quit, they once again had to find a remote person to replace him.

As someone in the tech industry (although granted I am not in my 20's anymore) I would do anything to avoid living in CA. I would literally choose almost any other state in the US over CA. MAYBE.... MAYBE.... San Diego. MAYBE. Although San Diego is going downhill pretty rapidly too. But there is little you could do to entice me into LA.

You might get some of the 20-something's fresh out of school jr's in CA. But you'll get more experienced workers in FL.