Some Red State/Blue State Indicia

sturg33 said:
Looks like the bill is for homeowners only. I would imagine majority of that $60B you cite is from business
Click to expand...
Perhaps without seeing the numbers I couldn't say. I don't necessarily think his plan is bad, if you could find a way to make it so actual home owners pay less property taxes but AirBnbs, businesses etc. pay morewould be a decent world to live in, but I cannot imagine that being easy.
 
It is worth noting that income in California grew faster than any other state in 2024.

I'm sure California is doing many thangs wrong.

Maybe the strong growth in income is due to nice weather, luck, stock options, etc.
 
sturg33 said:
What policy do you think is driving it
Click to expand...
Just to make sure 2024 is not a fluke I looked at growth in per capita income from 2010 to 2023. During this period, California has grown by 86% and Florida 63%. We know the differences in policy. California spends more on all sorts of thangs. It regulates more. It has a much more progressive tax system. The question is whether the growth is due to this more active state government or despite it. Causality is a difficult thang to establish. It could be California is lucky, has good weather, etc. But they are probably doing some thangs right.

I'll just mention one way in which California invests more (and maybe more smartly) in its people. It has actively enhanced access to Pell-eligible students through its state-funded Cal Grant program, which often stacks with Pell Grants to cover more costs (e.g., tuition, fees, and living expenses). Florida (and most other states) have nothing like this.
 
Last edited:
More broadly there are a number of studies that show states (like California) that expanded medicaid under the ACA have done better economically than those that didn't (like Florida). The studies include research from the Kaiser Family Foundation, the Center on Budget Policy and Priorities, and many academic papers. The main mechanism is pretty straightforward. Better access to healthcare leads to a healthier and more productive workforce. There are some other more subtle mechanisms (that are of interest to geeky academics but probably no one else) but they don't need to be discussed here.
 
It is an audacious argument to make, but maybe state government spending produces some good thangs: like healthier and more productive workers. Maybe regulations to enhance worker safety and reduce environmental degradation also help. It is not far-fetched to think they too might contribute to a healthier and more productive (not to say longer-lived) population. Maybe a progressive tax system helps too. I know those are crazy heretical thoughts.
 
Your continued reliance to insist that massive technology business (which drive high incomes and company valuations) is due to California's democratic state government policies is why you have turned into a joke on here.
 
nsacpi said:
It is an audacious argument to make, but maybe state government spending produces some good thangs: like healthier and more productive workers. Maybe regulations to enhance worker safety and reduce environmental degradation also help. Maybe a progressive tax system helps. I know those are crazy heretical thoughts.
Click to expand...
Maybe it helps reduce homelessness and poverty rates too?
 
sturg33 said:
Your continued reliance to insist that massive technology business (which drive high incomes and company valuations) is due to California's democratic state government policies is why you have turned into a joke on here.
Click to expand...
We can set aside California and look at Washington or Massachusetts or New York or New Jersey or Connecticut. States that also invest in their people, in education, in health and in the environment. They all have outcomes with respect to longevity, educational attainment and productivity that are much more impressive than Florida or Texas.
 
But I don't want to set aside California. It is the engine of much of what passes for growth in places like Arkansas and Oklahoma. Those states would be like Mexico if not for the technological and financial spillovers they are lucky enough to receive simply by being in the same economic union as California.
 
nsacpi said:
We can set aside California and look at Washington or Massachusetts or New York or New Jersey or Connecticut. States that also invest in their people, in education, in health and in the environment. They all have outcomes with respect to longevity, educational attainment and productivity that are much more impressive than Florida or Texas.
Click to expand...
why is that leading to mass population exodus?
 
sturg33 said:
why is that leading to mass population exodus?
Click to expand...
I would go with a two-part explanation. Success drives out the bad. I know it sounds harsh. But thangs are nice and expensive in those parts of the country where people are very productive. And for those in those areas who are not so productive life is harsh and expensive. So they move to someplace more their speed.

But there is a second part, which is a policy mistake. Permitting rules have gone crazy in many blue states and created a housing crisis. It is a case of good intentions gone too far. Hopefully, the pendulum swings back a bit. The YIMBY movement gives me some hope. Let them build. Not all Democrats are aboard. It is an interesting debate happening within the party. I hope the Let Em Build wing wins out. Obviously, the right policy is to find the right balance. But pendulum has swung too far and the right adjustment is to make it easier to build.
 
nsacpi said:
I would go with a two-part explanation. Success drives out the bad. I know it sounds harsh. But thangs are nice and expensive in those parts of the country where people are very productive. And for those in those areas who are not so productive life is harsh and expensive. So they move to someplace more their speed.
Click to expand...
This logic would imply that the receiving states (TX, FL) should be seeing worse outcomes and slower growth thanks to absorbing the bad

(Spare me the unsurious response of raising average IQ of both states)
 
sturg33 said:
This logic would imply that the receiving states (TX, FL) should be seeing worse outcomes and slower growth thanks to absorbing the bad

(Spare me the unsurious response of raising average IQ of both states)
Click to expand...
I'm mostly joking about that. But there is probably something to it. Florida and to a lesser extent Texas get a disproportionate number of older washed-up people. They are not getting the creme de la creme.
 
nsacpi said:
I'm mostly joking about that. But there is probably something to it. Florida and to a lesser extent Texas get a disproportionate number of older washed-up people.
Click to expand...
Then their outcomes should be declining, not improving. California and Florida have the same income growth rates over the last decade.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top