Gay Marriage, Gay Revenue
And while we're in the mood for economic vs. moral justifications, this just in:
Legalizing same-sex marriage in Maryland would result in a $3.2 million gain to the state’s annual budget and significantly boost the state economy, according to a study released Wednesday by the Williams Institute at the University of California, Los Angeles, School of Law. The study found that about 7,800 same-sex couples would marry if they could and that such weddings would generate $94 million in revenue each year, stimulating Maryland businesses and the state economy in general. This spending, the study showed, would create about $14 million in annual tax revenue as well.
Researchers also concluded that the loss in state income tax due to same-sex marriage would be minimal: only about $132,000 annually. The state would also suffer a loss of $1.4 million from transfer taxes.
["Study: Maryland Makes Money With Same-Sex Marriage", advocate.com, 29 November 2007.]
Isaac and I could well be one of those 7,800 who would marry here in our state if we could, but it seems unlikely to me that we're going to spend $12,000 on our wedding. Sorry. Not that it won't be faaabulous, of course, just that we would more likely do it with the extensive assistance of coerced volunteers.
Naturally, generous wedding gifts, particularly of cash, are welcome at any time.
5 Responses
Subscribe to comments via RSS
Subscribe to comments via RSS
Leave a Reply
To thwart spam, comments by new people are held for moderation; give me a bit of time and your comment will show up.
I welcome comments -- even dissent -- but I will delete without notice irrelevant, rude, psychotic, or incomprehensible comments, particularly those that I deem homophobic, unless they are amusing. The same goes for commercial comments and trackbacks. Sorry, but it's my blog and my decisions are final.
on Friday, 30 November 2007 at 16.33
Permalink
Interesting. Chamber of Commerce meets Gay marriage.
The study quoted an industry group that said the average wedding in Maryland costs $32,910. (They dialed that down for same sex couples.) That seems high, but I suppose it depends on what one counts: "Let's see. For a traditional wedding, first you need to grow a little girl from infancy to adulthood, and this costs a bunch…"
The methodology in the Williams report left a big pucker on my face. They make some assumptions I question, such as 1/4 of same sex couples in the states surrounding Maryland will come in to marry, and 5% of same sex couples in 40 other states will travel for this.
))The study found that about 7,800 same-sex couples would marry if they could and that such weddings would generate $94 million in revenue each year, stimulating Maryland businesses and the state economy in general.((
A couple things here. First, much of this revenue would have been spent anyway. And, after the initial rush of same sex couples get done blowing their current and future savings on a wedding, you are not going to have this kind of activity in the out years. The study put a 3 year span on getting all the pent-ups married. Then we are down to the newcomers on the scene. And the costs to business of benefits for same sex couples gets downplayed in the study. At one point they call it $5.7 million a year, but when I applied their methodology to Maryland's private workforce, I get $16 million a year. And this goes on every year after the wedding (and honeymoon) is over.
on Friday, 30 November 2007 at 18.14
Permalink
It's an interesting factoid the particulars of which will be subject to the kind of questioning RSF does. It strikes me the economics involved wouldn't make or break the state, whatever the precise numbers turn out to be.
The more significant aspect of it is equity: making fairness for all state policy.
on Saturday, 1 December 2007 at 06.05
Permalink
>>The more significant aspect of it is equity: making fairness for all state policy.
The current system seems unfair to single people: they often do the same work for less benefits than married people. Maybe fairness is paying people for the value of their work, independent of their marital status. If you want to be married and raise children, budget ahead of time.
on Tuesday, 11 December 2007 at 13.19
Permalink
>>The current system seems unfair to single people: they often do the same work for less benefits than married people
I agree – and there are also inequities if you are married but childfree. No taking off early to look after your kids if you don't have any, rather, you stay behind to cover for the parents.
Oh, and $12,000 for a wedding? Are they insane?
on Thursday, 13 December 2007 at 00.12
Permalink
They are insane, but some people will easily spend that much for a wedding.
I expect we can all agree that this is on the pointless side of argument, but it has some effect in short-circuiting other pointless arguments about the exorbitant cost to the state of allowing same-sex marriage.