The Globe tries to figure out the exodus

In its lead editorial today, the Boston Globe, asks "Which state will we be?"

Obviously, we will never become Mississippi nor California. We are too rich to be the former and lack the sunshine of the latter. Clearly the high cost of housing is among the major reasons why people are leaving the Bay State and apparently in droves. Better jobs in more congenial, business friendly states are another. And then there's "certain taxes" which oddly doesn't figure in the Globe's survey of Massachusetts exiles. That's because of the way the survey is presented. Tax concerns are are marbled in with the high cost variable, a neat analytical treat that obscures the centrality of taxes.

The high cost of living in Massachusetts, especially housing, fuel, insurance, and certain taxes, is a familiar culprit.

"Certain taxes?" It must of killed the editorial writer to include taxes in the Globe's litany. Which taxes might those be? The personal income tax? The sales tax? High property taxes despite Proposition 2 1/ 2? The reason the Globe doesn't specify the taxes is that it believes that state taxes do not matter in any signifcant way. They also belive raising them incessently actually increases economic growth. But what do you expect from a cabal of editorial writers that actually believes the Romney universal health care law will lower health care costs.

There's more to the Globe's wrong-headed take.

The Globe acknowledges that there's a certain smugness about the Commonwealth. No kidding.

Beyond pocketbook issues, a set of intangibles helps create an unflattering overall impression of Massachusetts: a culture many see as smug and unfriendly to newcomers; a reserved, change-averse business community; an opaque and at
times corrupt political bureaucracy. Or, in the words of a recent Boston Foundation analysis: ''Old, cold, expensive, unwelcoming, and a difficult place to get things done."

Let's go back to tax policy. Like most liberals, the Globe editorial writers maintain that our bloated government can't afford a personal income tax rollback to 5 percent, a mandate from the voters in 2000. But better to divine the intentions of the voters (they really didn't mean to vote that way) and cater to to the tax and spend lobby which makes up a large part of the Globe's vanishing readership.

Trying to divine what the voters really meant, the Globe condescendingly believes the voters didn't really want a tax cut because it would mean fewer services. You read this all time in New England's largest paper. But along the way that meme proved harder to sustain. In 2002, voters almost voted to abolish the state personal income taxes sponsored by activist libertarians. Since then Globe ignores the temptation to weigh in with any inspid interpretations of what the voters really meant. It doesn't serve their liberal agenda.

Yes, there's a certain distrust of state and local government "to get things done." That's a healthy attitude. Massachusetts has many competitive advantages that can be solidfied if the rent-seekers -- unions, zoning zealots and Big Dig construction cabals and human services complex -- could be held at bay. Most businesses that could create jobs think twice about coming here instead of New Hampshire or down south or overseas.

The Globe is part of that smugness. It's wise to run away from such posturing.