CDZ Demographic/Economic Disaster How Rapid?

[william the wie]

One of the other boards I post on had the annual United/Allied net migration data reports. There are also U-Haul and Ryder net migration reports. They correlate with each other to a high degree.so the same pattern emerges from all of them:

Net tax payers migrate out of Blue states and into Red states.

Net tax consumers migrate into Blue states and out of Red states.

Because of rising tuition costs and generally older infrastructure Blue states are also losing the technological hot spots and other economic attractors that keep them going at a compound interest rate. An example of this is that ND is THE hot spot for drone development because it has such low levels of air traffic. This has happened much more rapidly than Austin becoming the hotspot for computer games.

So, how fast is this shift compounding? That the blue wall is headed for disaster has been noted for decades. "The Sunbelt", "The Nine Nations of North America" and similar works have been around since at least the Nixon administration. Or if you want a more neutral measure the center of population map that can be found on Wikipedia with migration becoming more southern than western @ 1930. At what point will this change become acute and disastrous? Any reasoned arguments?

 

[Josf]

In order to reason out (with help, not "argument for the sake of argument") this phenomenon measured in this migratory way I think it is important to explain what is known as free market forces.

Those who are free to choose better from worse do so and precisely as it is in their power to do so. Slaves will runaway from slavery. Slave masters will run away from defenders of slaves, so the slave masters will run to places where they can get away with slavery.

Where the slaves are free from slavery that place is a free market place in the sense that slaves are in command of the power they need to be free to choose not to be a slave.

Where the slave masters are free to enslave people, on the other hand, that is the end of free markets, as the slaves are no longer empowered to be able to choose to live in a place where runaway slaves are effectively defended against enslavement by the slave traders.

This was not unknown when this place was once federated as a number of people in a number of states, as explained here:

Reclaiming the American Revolution The Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions and Their Legacy William Watkins 9781403963031 Amazon.com Books

Quote:___________________________________________________
Second, federalism permits the states to operate as laboratories of democracy-to experiment with various policies and Programs. For example, if Tennessee wanted to provide a state-run health system for its citizens, the other 49 states could observe the effects of this venture on Tennessee's economy, the quality of care provided, and the overall cost of health care. If the plan proved to be efficacious other states might choose to emulate it, or adopt a plan taking into account any problems surfacing in Tennessee. If the plan proved to be a disastrous intervention, the other 49 could decide to leave the provision of medical care to the private sector. With national plans and programs, the national officials simply roll the dice for all 284 million people of the United States and hope they get things right.

Experimentation in policymaking also encourages a healthy competition among units of government and allows the people to vote with their feet should they find a law of policy detrimental to their interests. Using again the state-run health system as an example, if a citizen of Tennessee was unhappy with Tennessee's meddling with the provisions of health care, the citizen could move to a neighboring state. Reallocation to a state like North Carolina, with a similar culture and climate, would not be a dramatic shift and would be a viable option. Moreover, if enough citizens exercised this option, Tennessee would be pressured to abandon its foray into socialized medicine, or else lose much of its tax base. To escape a national health system, a citizen would have to emigrate to a foreign country, an option far less appealing and less likely to be exercised than moving to a neighboring state. Without competition from other units of government, the national government would have much less incentive than Tennessee would to modify the objectionable policy. Clearly, the absence of experimentation and competition hampers the creation of effective programs and makes the modification of failed national programs less likely.
__________________________________________________________

So long as people are effectively defending slaves from slavery in one area (blue at one time was so called "conservative" by the way, and red was once "communist") so long will there be a sanctuary for runaway slaves, in that blue, or that red, area. So long as slave traders are defending their power to enslave their slaves, in a red area, or a blue area, so long will there be a place for slave traders to go and be free from any moral defense against such crimes.

"Net tax payers migrate out of Blue states and into Red states."

Is it a tax, really, or is it an extortion payment? If someone must expend all the costs required to run away from involuntary taxation (extortion) then that is itself an added "tax" added to any other "taxes" already paid to those enforcing such extortion.

As to how rapid will slaves runaway from slavery when it is in their power to do so?

If the structure of the federation is false then the slave masters run the whole show, and they take the lion's share of the productive capacity of the slaves; while the lesser slave masters at the false "State" level, or the false "City" level, or the false "Corporation" level, are left fighting each other over the remaining crumbs.

That is simple to quantify with a simple comparison between the extortion racket known as the IRS, and the other extortion racket known as the state liabilities. The obvious measure of who is the boss of who is clearly marked.

What happens if one of the states, or several of the states, outlaw all forms of slavery, and those people in those states welcome runaway slaves whose only duty in that federation is to participate in due process, which is jury duty, or in case of invasion by an aggressive military force perpetrating war of aggression, it is the duty of free people to do what they can to defend against such crimes.

If that is not a familiar theme, then the slaves will not find sanctuary from slave masters in blue or red states. Arranging the chairs on the Titanic comes to mind, or game theory, as explained through something called the prisoner's dilemma also comes to mind. The migration is perpetual as the severity of the "business cycle" forcing migration fluctuates from feast (boom) to famine (bust), here, then there, then here again.

 

[william the wie]

Well the Blue state death spiral is inevitable for a variety of reasons:

The multiple mountain ranges and other factors that shipping to and from the west coast a nightmare. And this is leading to the expansion of the Panama canal and the possible building of a Nicarauguan canal to bypass the west coast

The greater cost of heating vs. cooling on the east coast combined with show and salt reducing the life span of infrastructure in the northeast quarter of the country means higher costs to get the same result.

I would attribute left-liberal statism to the effects of paying more to get the same result becoming more acute as technology advances.

 

[Freemason9]

There is no "blue state death spiral." You should try to remember that blue states continue to subsidize red states. If red states didn't receive massive aid from the federal government (blue states), they would be forced to pay their own way and raise local/state taxes. Kansas, Nebraska, and the Dakotas are prime examples; with such sparse population over relatively large geographic areas, the small populations of those states would never be able to afford infrastructure and fundamental human services--especially when you consider the lower incomes of those places.

Also, people in blue states tend to be more mobile due to higher incomes, higher educations, and more frequent employment changes. Rural red state residents often tend to be "locked in" to agricultural life styles and don't leave the farm.

The data of the survey you cited may be correct, but the inferences are entirely up for debate.

Kansas is a shithole without federal aid (and it's no paradise as it is).

 

[william the wie]

Actually the subsidy crap is mostly pulling land out of potential development combined with extremely creative accounting.

 

[jwoodie]

Can we tighten up this discussion? Starting with a clear proposition?

 

[william the wie]

Can we tighten up this discussion? Starting with a clear proposition?

All other things being equal people and businesses are rent-seeking.

Except for Chicago being the mouth of the Illinois canal that links the Great Lakes to the Mississippi there is no state within the 13 state Blue State wall has a unique and immobile comparative advantage.

Blue and Purple states added on taxes and hard/expensive to upgrade infrastructure such as the Washington-Boston train shuttle during the period 1830-1930.

Massive drops in real estate prices particularly on the west coast would be needed to make infrastructure fundable with eminent domain. That is due to mountains making land logistics really crappy.

Starting 1920-30 the center of population switched from westward movement to west south westward and the southward component has been increasing since what looks like 1970. Non-census data mentioned in the OP indicates that this is more the result of reduced westward net migration and the net migration south has been pretty steady since the 1923-6 housing bubble.

 

[auditor0007]

All this movement of people to the west, south and southwest will come to a sudden stop when water shortages become unmanageable. I probably won't see much of this take place, but my kids likely will. If there is an issue that would ever truly bring some states to the point of secession, it could be southern and western states demanding access to water from the Great Lakes.

 

[william the wie]

All this movement of people to the west, south and southwest will come to a sudden stop when water shortages become unmanageable. I probably won't see much of this take place, but my kids likely will. If there is an issue that would ever truly bring some states to the point of secession, it could be southern and western states demanding access to water from the Great Lakes.

That is forbidden by various treaties dating back to the War of 1812. Also southern states and states east of the Rockies tend to have more problems with flooding than drought. The cost of shipping water into, much less west of, the Rockies is literally monumental. Until and unless desalinization becomes dirt cheap the west and southwest are toast. For that matter the proper building codes for fire, quakes and floods all differ markedly. A tropical wave hitting CA and it has happened in the past could easily cause more damage and loss of life than a 9.0 earthquake.