What’s preventing conservative states from being able to pay for their own social programs and infrastructure?
Is it liberal states absorbing all the wealth so that the conservative states can’t grow? Is it that being conservative is actually really really bad for the economy? Maybe they just never recovered from having slavery taken away and refused to adapt. Because there’s definitely something going on…
Personally, I think climate has a lot to do with it. Texas overcomes their climate because of oil, but look at the bottom 10 GDP states compared to the top 10:
Top 10:
California
Texas
New York
Florida
Illinois
Pennsylvania
Ohio
Georgia
Washington
New Jersey
You’re going to boil your ass working in Texas, Florida, and Georgia. Oil makes it worth it in Texas. Agriculture, aerospace and defense in Georgia, apparently. Tourism in Florida.
Bottom 10:
West Virginia
Delaware
Maine
Rhode Island
Montana
North Dakota
South Dakota
Alaska
Wyoming
Vermont
1/2 of this list is known for brutal cold. I think all Rhode Island produces is commuters to New York. LOL.
When a State actually takes care of it’s citizens, it becomes a better place to live and start businesses. That attracts and creates better educated and more affluent people, which makes it a better place to live and do business. People flee the poorer states for a better chance at success in the liberal state. Repeat this for a century or so and that’s how conservative states become shitholes and liberal states (and countries) are much better off.
That’s kind of the point. Financial capability is what leads this divergence. Those who have wealth take their wealth with them, leaving the state they come from further impoverished.
The discussion is not about equity or equality (which is what I believe your comment is pointing to), but instead looking at why this divergence potentially occurs.
You know? It really begs the question:
What’s preventing conservative states from being able to pay for their own social programs and infrastructure?
Is it liberal states absorbing all the wealth so that the conservative states can’t grow? Is it that being conservative is actually really really bad for the economy? Maybe they just never recovered from having slavery taken away and refused to adapt. Because there’s definitely something going on…
Personally, I think climate has a lot to do with it. Texas overcomes their climate because of oil, but look at the bottom 10 GDP states compared to the top 10:
Top 10:
California
Texas
New York
Florida
Illinois
Pennsylvania
Ohio
Georgia
Washington
New Jersey
You’re going to boil your ass working in Texas, Florida, and Georgia. Oil makes it worth it in Texas. Agriculture, aerospace and defense in Georgia, apparently. Tourism in Florida.
Bottom 10:
West Virginia
Delaware
Maine
Rhode Island
Montana
North Dakota
South Dakota
Alaska
Wyoming
Vermont
1/2 of this list is known for brutal cold. I think all Rhode Island produces is commuters to New York. LOL.
When a State actually takes care of it’s citizens, it becomes a better place to live and start businesses. That attracts and creates better educated and more affluent people, which makes it a better place to live and do business. People flee the poorer states for a better chance at success in the liberal state. Repeat this for a century or so and that’s how conservative states become shitholes and liberal states (and countries) are much better off.
Not everyone who would move can afford to move.
That’s kind of the point. Financial capability is what leads this divergence. Those who have wealth take their wealth with them, leaving the state they come from further impoverished.
The discussion is not about equity or equality (which is what I believe your comment is pointing to), but instead looking at why this divergence potentially occurs.
It is true, but how does that contradict their argument or disprove it in any way?
I didn’t say it did. F those poor people, I guess.