Trump winning the Presidency...

I don't find that "economic output by county" analysis all that convincing...

1) We know that within those counties, economic output is not evenly distributed, even if ALL of the voters voted for HRC, which we know is obviously not true as well. HRC destroyed Trump in voters making under $50K a year; he won voters making over $50K a year. You can aggregate the numbers then slice and dice them to tell any story you want...the linked article wants to give credit to HRC for carrying metropolitan economic output without acknowledging her strongest support came from the people in those metropolitan areas driving very little of that economic output.

2) In the metropolitan counties, how much of their economic impact is driven by people who don't vote in that county but commute there for work? Or are just there to visit? How much of New York county's economic output is created by people in Richmond county, Suffolk, Orange, Putnam, and other surrounding counties carried by Trump, or the ones where the vote was closer to 50/50?
 
1) or the people that made the widgets and produced the hands on " economic output "

not everyone within metropolitan areas is on welfare

2) you make a point.

Is there data ??

Looking for the un accounted for 2% of electorate

......

It simply blows my mind that the Electoral College / popular vote has such a disparity .

I get up to and maybe even a 1% disparity but 2+ %

????
 
57Brave said:
More interesting numbers gleaned from last months election:

................................................................................

Our observation: The less-than-500 counties that Hillary Clinton carried nationwide encompassed a massive 64 percent of America’s economic activity as measured by total output in 2015. By contrast, the more-than-2,600 counties that Donald Trump won generated just 36 percent of the country’s output—just a little more than one-third of the nation’s economic activity.

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/the-...de-high-output-america-vs-low-output-america/

........................

These numbers and this argument blows out of the water notions of makers and takers

??

And the future of innovation.

Rural America's unwillingness to invest in metropolitan infrastructure and how it holds us all back.

I am asking, isn't this exactly how our Rust Belt cities fell to ruin -

A what me worry lack of investment before the problem ?
Click to expand...

Serious question.

Are you saying it surprises you that less prosperous areas resent investment in the more prosperous areas?

Or are you saying that Calhoun, Georgia needs to invest in a local mass transit system?
 
Jaw said:
Serious question.
Are you saying it surprises you that less prosperous areas resent investment in the more prosperous areas?

yes, as the Brookings Inst report points out that investment or lack of investment would effect innovation
Suppose W Virginia tax dollars went area ABC that was working of developing an alternative product to coal that said product could be manufactured in West Virginia
Like say in 1980 . When Reagan Administration put all of their chips on coal

Or are you saying that Calhoun, Georgia needs to invest in a local mass transit system?

Yes, but I was thinking more along the lines of electrical grid etc to provide / enhance research and development.
Click to expand...

I am always surprised watching people vote opposite their interests
'...

Investing in our future rather than our past.
The key word being "our"
 
LOLGOP ‏@LOLGOP 5m5 minutes ago

The electoral college would be fairer if more Americans didn't prefer living under Democratic governance.
 
tumblr_ohzgazl7JT1rpf0t3o1_1280.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top