RSS
From the NYT:
The Growing Blue-State Diaspora
AUG. 23, 2014By Robert Gebeloff and David Leonhardt
As part of a recent analysis of migration patterns over the last century, based on census data, we created an index to see how these patterns might be altering the electorate. We started by defining each state as red, blue or purple, depending on whether it voted for only one party or both in the four presidential elections since 2000. The method gave us 10 purple, 18 blue and 22 red states. We then looked at what had happened since 2000 among natives of each kind of state.
The first thing we noticed was a major blue-to-red shift: Since 2000, the blue-born population in red states has grown by almost a quarter, to 11.5 million, or 12 percent of the states’ total population.
The changes in purple North Carolina (where the blue-born population is up an astounding 41 percent since 2000) and Georgia (30 percent) are fairly well-known. Perhaps not as well-known is the migration of blue-staters to South Carolina (39 percent), Utah (34 percent) and Idaho (30 percent). The Southeast and the interior West have become some of the most popular new destinations for American movers. They tend to be less expensive places to live than the Northeast and much of the West Coast.
These changes aren’t happening simply because the national population has grown over the same period, either. In fact, the red-born population in blue states shrank, to 7.3 million from 8.4 million, between 2000 and 2012. Some of this decline stems from the fact that California has become a less popular destination for people from all over the country, in part because of high housing costs. Illinois and Michigan, states that used to draw migrants seeking economic opportunity, have also become less attractive.
The article goes on to argue that this is making Red States bluer, although vice-versa could probably be argued about as well.
This kind of thing has been going on a long time, with difficult to predict impacts. For example, the dawn of Nixon’s Southern Strategy came in the three way 1968 election among Nixon, Humphrey, and Wallace. In the South, Wallace carried white voters concerned about the preservation of the old ways, typically whites who lived in close proximity to blacks. Humphrey carried Southern blue collar whites who didn’t live around blacks, often mountaineers and in coal or iron industrial hubs. Nixon carried Southern whites who wanted to put Jim Crow behind them and make the South part of modern America: typically suburbanites, often Northern transplants who worked for national corporations, or their neighbors.
In the long run, the Nixon voters in the South were, as President Obama likes to say, on the right side of history.
English
Arabic
Chinese (Simplified)
Dutch
French
German
Hebrew
Hindi
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Persian
Polish
Portuguese
Russian
Spanish
Swedish
Turkish
Vietnamese
So do you think the MSM broadcasting lots of news about blacks behaving badly is going to be good for the Democratic party in November or not?
Nonwhite California voters are solidly blue, but White California voters seem to be purple swing voters. Mitt Romney won a slight majority of the White California vote in 2012. Hussein Obama won a slight majority of the White California vote in 2008.
Mitt Romney must have done well with California White voters in the San Diego metropolitan area, Orange County, and the Inland Empire.
Do people here think it was a positive or negative that blacks were encouraged to vote in large numbers?
Looking at the quality of black politicians in the St. Louis area is shocking. For example, this:
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/missouri-state-sen-fuck-you-jay-nixon
I watch the conservative media go crazy over agitators like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. What they refuse to realize is that these agitators probably best represent the politics of black America. If they had an election, I had no doubt that Sharpton would win. So is that a plus or minus for our democracy and civilization?
Except that immigration is topping off the blue states with new, future Democratic voters, no? And at the same time, raising the cost of living in blue states sending more blue staters to red states.
In the long run, the Nixon voters in the South were, as President Obama likes to say, on the right side of history
But they weren’t right.
AZ was a barn red or possibly maroon state back during my youth next door. By contrast seems to be going infrared lately. It depends if you’re using the Pantone system
The GOP will still not get this. Just like they fail to see that third world immigration is handing democrats at least 2 out of every 3 newly minted voters, they fail to see that domestic immigration to red states will do the same. I’ve heard GOPers often state that “our” states are growing in population, and so in the future “we” will have more electoral votes. But they never account for the fact that much of that growth is from immigration, both foreign and domestic, that are making certain red states suddenly contestable.
Seriously, I’ve tried to have this discussion with republicans and they don’t get it. I try to point out that the democrats are spotted now with California (55 ev), New York (29 ev), Illinois (20 ev), Michigan (16 ev) , New Jersey (14 ev) and Massachusetts (11 ev). That is 145 electoral votes spotted to the democrats BEFORE the election even begins. That is 53% of the required 270 needed to win. I could use more states, but the point is those states are in no danger of going to the GOP and the democrats barely have to spend money defending them.
Yet the GOP is having to fight like heck to maintain more and more of its states. The battleground states are all states that should be GOP, like VA and FL. And now Texas appears to have a GOP expiration date. Once that state goes, presidential elections will be blowouts. You won’t even need to waste the money on them.
If the GOP can’t pick up the blatant clues about foreign immigrants going blue, I doubt a subtle concept like blue state diaspora will ever register with them.
The most enstupidating thing to happen to post-Clinton American political discourse has been the rise of this Redblueological Analysis fad. It’s the well of idiotic insights such as, “A state is a kind of a gerrymander” (–Slate). Anyway, I like to blame myself for this disgraceful trend
The blue staters migrating to Utah and Idaho are probably whites escaping from California, while a lot of the blue staters migrating to South Carolina are blacks from the north and midwest.
In the South, Wallace carried white voters concerned about the preservation of the old ways, typically whites who lived in close proximity to blacks. Humphrey carried Southern blue collar whites who didn’t live around blacks, often mountaineers and in coal or iron industrial hubs. Nixon carried Southern whites who wanted to put Jim Crow behind them and make the South part of modern America: typically suburbanites, often Northern transplants who worked for national corporations, or their neighbors.
This is about as spot-on as it gets: you are rarely not spot-on – just here, more so. The 1968 election has been much on my mind lately (I was born in ’69), as we are getting my maternal grandparent’s home and the 140 acres around it for final sale much of this summer, in Cushing, OK. Working with my Dad to replace the plumbing, bring everything up to code, etc., there has been much talk, prompted by my questioning, about those times.
In 1964, my Missouri-born Dad voted for Goldwater; my Oklahoma-born Mom and Grandmother voted for LBJ. My maternal Grandmother was an old-school FDR Democrat, and Payne County Democratic female mover & shaker back in the times of “Feminism before Feminism,” aka “Diversity before Diversity.” She was also a great admirer of Senator Richard Russell of GA – all of him, and his basic Southern beliefs & ideology…the cleft & divide was well on its way by the 1960s.
In 1968, my Dad – an Air Force vet educated in cutting-edge electronics (for 1961) for eleven months at Keesler AFB who went on to channel that into a career post-military and retire from what would become California-based Seagate Technology in 2006 – voted for Richard Nixon. He didn’t hold much brief for “civil rights” in general or Blacks Acting Badly in particular, but was ready by 1968 to “move on” as our modern vernacular would have it. My Mom, thoroughly disgusted with LBJ’s coddling of hippies and blacks – she’d grown up in “close proximity” to the latter in Cushing – voted for George Wallace. She to this day makes no bones about the fact that she attended a George Wallace rally in OKC while she was pregnant with me, and enjoyed every minute of it. My grandmother stuck with Hubert Humphrey: she hated Nixon, and couldn’t imagine that what LBJ had unleashed could possibly get any worse. Besides, all that “rioting business” was a long ways off, wasn’t it? Local blacks still called her “ma’am” or “Mrs. Deering,” didn’t they? So the real problem was: Herbert Hoover.
This almost exactly parallels your analysis above in just one family in the South, and in a peculiarly volatile time in American history: between 1964 and 1968 America, the Levee truly did break on a whole lot of levels, as Led Zeppelin’s iconic cover of Memphis Minnie’s 1927 tune quite accurately told us in 1971. The Levee had done gone and broke: by 1972, about everyone in decent human being America – from coast to coast – was a Nixon voter, FDR New Dealer or ’64 LBJ voter or ’68 Humphrey stalwart from the past or no. And despite the lingering doubts about Tricky instilled in many long-time Democrat voters heads by Helen Gahagan Douglas back in 1950.
America’s always been an interesting place: but never so much as when the Levees have, indeed, broke, and flooded our national terrain with crises that have led to seismic cultural and political floods that shifted electoral river beds. 1968 was such a year.
OT: Steve, why do you never talk about the other aspect of the open borders problem–droves of Moslems coming into the US (and Europe). The UK and other European countries are bracing to deal with native-born people who became mujadheddin in Syria and will soon come back, trained in the terrorist arts. How long until we have to deal with this here?
http://buzzpo.com/liberal-ivy-league-professor-deleted-racist-tweets-late/?utm
‘shooting us’ and ‘video awards’.
such moral clarity and balance.
not to worry, lady.
this bro owns both the shootings and the music.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/08/24/rap-music-mogul-expected-to-survive-after-he-was-shot-reportedly-six-times-in-l-a-nightclub-but-hes-been-down-this-road-before/
How right side of history will it be when every cop and officer of the court is Black? Would you trust say Suge Knight or Rev Als cousins to be fair and non corrupt?
Blue Red is best understood as a religious war between the Colors of Benetton and historic America.
The shift from blue to lower cost-of-living red states is, I have to think, the first wave of baby boomer retirees migrating to cheaper retirement zones and, at the same time, escaping the minorities resident in and the immigrants swarming into blue states that have loads of high tax levies to pay for the GibMeDats for them. Besides, how many White boomer retirees want to move just one county away to burgeoning Section 8 instant-ghettos such as Ferguson?
There’s also been a concurrent significant rise in sales & ownership of manufactured (mobile) homes, which many of the less affluent boomer retirees can just about afford to plant in the red states they move to for retirement.
http://www.newrepublic.com/article/119187/mortgage-foreclosures-2015-why-crisis-will-flare-again
This is shaping up to be a test of your Affordable Family Formation. Are the Ex-Bostonians in Sandy Springs, now realizing they can now afford to have 2 more kids and mom stay home, bringing blue or turning red?
Rise of Planet of Apes is pretty good.
The comments on the NYT article are hilariously stupid. They are all by liberals saying either (1) I can’t imagine anyone wanting to live in a red state, obviously ignoring the actual data or (2) The only people moving to the red states must already be Republicans, because why else would anyone want to move there?
Maybe the fact that you can buy a house with a yard and raise three kids on a middle class salary, plus enjoy low taxes, and don’t particularly care if there isn’t a coffee shop every two blocks.
“Yet the GOP is having to fight like heck to maintain more and more of its states. The battleground states are all states that should be GOP, like VA and FL.”
Remember when Ohio, Colorado, and Nevada used to be solid red states that Dubya won twice in 2000 and 2004. Now no Republican politician will ever win those 3 states in a presidential election again.
Sailer: what’s the deal with comments on older posts? Are they no longer saved and viewable? What kind of shop is Unz running?!!
Here’s a random example; one of many:
https://www.unz.com/isteve/chautauqua-the-most-post-protestant-place-in-the-world/
There’s a lot of guff written about Nixon apart from being a dastardly crook he wasn’t even a particularly good president. It was under his watch that the massive mestizo transformation of the USA really began in earnest. He enshrined AA into federal law and not the Democrats. It was Nixon who unilaterally reneged on the gold standard and thus unleashed the terrible economic turbulence that still plagues the global economy to this day.
Not as god-awful as George W Bush – admittedly an impossible task – but a rubbish president all the same.
Excuse the OT , but i think i found something that no one has noticed yet:
Go to 3.49 of Nicki Minaj’s latest hit song “anaconda.” I’m pretty sure she says “white girl”.
To put it into context, before 3.49, Minaj says, “fu** da skinny btiches* in da club. I got a fat ass. F*** da skinny bitche*.” And then she says something that sounds a lot like “white girl”, but which the official lyrics say is “what gyeah”, which, as far as i can tell, isn’t really a widely used phrase or used a second time in Minaj’s song.
I think it’s clear whom Minaj is referring to in her rant against “skinny bitche*”, so it would make a lot of sense for her to slip a cryptic “white girl” lyric in there somewhere.
Anyway, watch the video and judge for yourself.
Yes, it’s not just Florida getting them… have you been to Myrtle Beach or Hilton Head lately? How about Branson, MO or Hot Springs, Ark.? Sapphire Valley, NC and Helen, GA? Don’t go at the wrong time of the year or you’ll be in a huge traffic jam just like back home in rush hour.
“If the GOP can’t pick up the blatant clues about foreign immigrants going blue, I doubt a subtle concept like blue state diaspora will ever register with them.”
I think most of them are aware of what’s happening, but don’t really care. For most GOPers it doesn’t matter that this new vibrancy will one day probably vote them out of office, because a fantastically corrupt world of lobbying awaits them. One that provides far more opportunities for wealth and power than being in office ever could. For many in Congress it’s just not something they want to think about.
Pundits are a different matter. Most of the corrupt world of “conservatism inc” are becoming divided on this question. On the one hand you have stooges like Dinesh D’Sousa, Michael Medved, and Erick Erickson who spout the typical corporatist Adelson open-borders crap. On the other you have some figures like Rich Lowry and David Frum who, as repulsive as they are, seem to understand that the browning of America will doom their future career hopes. Which is something, I suppose.
The open-borders GOP candidates, particularly Ed Gillespie, seem to be doing rather badly in the polls lately, but I doubt that will slow them down.
“So do you think the MSM broadcasting lots of news about blacks behaving badly is going to be good for the Democratic party in November or not?”
Steve’s premise was that this Ferguson bruhaha was an attempt to galvanize the black voting base, just like Trayvon was. Whether the Trayvon ploy worked is up for debate, but at least there was a single black candidate they could get behind. If the Dems really think this ploy will work in the midterms, however, then they are dumber than I thought. First of all, any black democratic congressman is likely to get reelected no matter what happens, as they are basically all in majority black districts. So the beneficiaries of Fergoson would have to be white Democratic congressmen and senators seeking reelection. These are Dems elected by a white majority, and they depend heavily on the white swing voters. They will lose far more of these voters because of Ferguson then they will gain black voters. I just don’t see black rage being channeled into turning up at the polls to vote some SWPL candidate into office.
Here's a random example; one of many:
https://www.unz.com/isteve/chautauqua-the-most-post-protestant-place-in-the-world/Replies: @Steve Sailer
I see 52 comments.
I now live in what is called the Lower Great Lakes Region. I moved here about 9-10 months ago from Austin, Texas, more correct actually South Austin, which had become majority Latino. South Austin is fine. There was little or no difference to me in the White residents and the Latinos, the majority of which in Austin are probably second, third, fourth generation Texans. They loved their Longhorns and Cowboys, many of them have Texas drawls for their accents.
But this new place is almost like paradise. The per capita income is not high at all, but you wouldn’t know from looking at them and in the way the houses and town is groomed. It is a post card perfect place, clean, neat, organized. There is literally no crime. You often only see the police hanging around the Circle K late at night because there is nothing for them to do. I figure that by not squandering money on the criminal justice system, then money gets spent on other stuff like the swimming pool the elementary school has and the summer rec program where all the kids go in the summer, get breakfast and lunch, arts and crafts, and swimming. And the place is so white that is almost a shock to see any sort of minorities. And outside of the big cities, the whole state is like this.
Since Sailor had made a comment a few weeks ago about there being less motive to move to CA because that economy was so dominated by immigrants and a native born American was at a disadvantage, I started noticing that the young people here are starting to stick here instead of moving. There is less reason to pull them away to the bigger cities, less big jobs, less glamour. Sure there will always be a looks drain and a brain drain where the prettiest women and the smartest people will be drawn to national and regional capitals. But I am thinking that from here on out, the majority, like 90% are going to stick here because it sucks every where else.
There was an interesting chart on Bleacher Report that showed how the Big 10 was going to come under challenge because its recruiting area wasn’t growing in population compared to the west, to Texas, and to the Southeast. Those other areas are projected to grow by 20 something percent and the Big 10 area is only to grow by 3.8%. I assume that growth is due to a lack of immigrants coming to the area. So I would assume that this is and will be the white area of the United States. And Pittsburg is becoming its cultural capital. My opinion is that you guys that aren’t here, should come here and dig in. Your grand kids will thank you for it.
I’m living in a PMS 280 state, but I’m looking to move to a PMS 485 locale. PMS 254 need no apply.
The blue-staters move to red states because they like the contrast from whence they came. Contrary to media and Hollywood propaganda, the red states tend to be more civilized, more sane, more kind, less populated, cheaper to live, and quieter. But then the blue state transplants want to change those areas to be just like where they came from. They want more taxes, bigger government, gay pride and all the other PC BS, more cops, gated communities, and illegal immigrants to clean their houses. And most irritating is that they make fun of the “locals”.
They love to move to scenery states and create resorty type areas like Sun Valley, the Bozeman area of Montana, Aspen, etc. Thank goodness I live in a fly-over state with no scenery.
I’d be careful about assuming that blue-state migration makes a red state “bluer”. Here in Massachusetts, many people have migrated across the border to lower-tax/COL New Hampshire. But if you analyze the voting returns in NH, you find that the southern counties (where the transplants tend to live so that they can still commute to Boston) are actually considerably to the right of the northern/native New Hampshirite counties.
The people who choose to migrate away from a place are not (almost by definition) representative of it…
Maybe they are just voting with their feet. And the stupid party is doing a lot better on average in state&local government than the other party and Bush.
Nixon was on the wrong side of history. I know Steve doesn’t believe it but things are about to get even more racial in politics. Blacks and Browns are demanding their own leaders. They don’t want Whites representing them. This will undercut the people at the top of our current power structure.
White liberals, moderates and Nixon types won’t have their Black, Brown and Asian voters supporting them anymore. Without support from most Whites or from People of Color, they will fall.
Whites will demand their own spokesmen just like People of Color are doing. THAT is the future.
Nixon was a blip. He was on the wrong side of history.
Just an anecdote, but most of the people I know around here (blue state) who have been moving to red states are high-prole blacks, prole whites, and sundry other groups (like Hispanics who were born in the US.) SWPLs tend to move into specific inner city areas and gentrify them, or they move to their own suburbs, distinct from white prole suburbs.
“”””For example, the dawn of Nixon’s Southern Strategy came in the three way 1968 election among Nixon, Humphrey, and Wallace.”””
Actually the beginning of Nixon Southern Strategy began in 1932 when blacks abandoned the Republicans for the Democratic Party.
Yeppers.
I have posted this before. But here goes again. I know something about Jackson Hole, WY. In the 1970s, lots of middle class Whites, as well as 3rd and 4th generation ranchers, lived in the area. Hosted the tourists with good humor.
Starting in the 90s when Californians could sell their beach shacks for half a million, they started moving in in droves. The resultant run up in housing meant old Wyoming families with generational roots could no longer afford their property taxes and sold and left.
The Californians, meanwhile neededtheir helot class, you know.
So here’s their solution: Import a bunch of illegal aliens, but house them in Driggs, ID.
I.e.,
tuck their ugly servants safely out of sight behind the mountain of an evening, lest they spoil the view of sunset over the Tetons.
That is to say, liberal pukes from California, spewing hooey about Civil Rights, yada yada, have achieved their nouveau Sundown Towns.
Hypocrites!
And pity the poor old White citizens of Driggs, ID!
A lot of the anti-California migrant crap you see is resentment over the fact that in 1980 their parents paid $50,000 for houses in California now worth $800,000, while the people in the inland West's parents paid the same $50,000 for houses now worth $125,000.
Looking at the quality of black politicians in the St. Louis area is shocking. For example, this:
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/missouri-state-sen-fuck-you-jay-nixon
As Jared Taylor recently wrote about Ferguson, we have Africa within the United States. On the other hand some of the Jamaicans (immigrants) I have met are civilized and interested in intelligent things. Like having backyard fruit trees and other edibles growing on their property. I call that smart. One does a lot of bicycle racing which must be big in “The Islands”. Totally black dude, no white admixture like Eric Holder who is so white, what he has is black admixture
http://www.bostonglobe.com/ideas/2014/08/23/where-slavery-thrived-inequality-rules-today/iF5zgFsXncPoYmYCMMs67J/story.html
I have posted this before. But here goes again. I know something about Jackson Hole, WY. In the 1970s, lots of middle class Whites, as well as 3rd and 4th generation ranchers, lived in the area. Hosted the tourists with good humor.
Starting in the 90s when Californians could sell their beach shacks for half a million, they started moving in in droves. The resultant run up in housing meant old Wyoming families with generational roots could no longer afford their property taxes and sold and left.
The Californians, meanwhile neededtheir helot class, you know.
So here's their solution: Import a bunch of illegal aliens, but house them in Driggs, ID.
I.e.,
tuck their ugly servants safely out of sight behind the mountain of an evening, lest they spoil the view of sunset over the Tetons.
That is to say, liberal pukes from California, spewing hooey about Civil Rights, yada yada, have achieved their nouveau Sundown Towns.
Hypocrites!
And pity the poor old White citizens of Driggs, ID!Replies: @Art Deco, @Lot
The hispanic population of Teton County, Idaho is 17.3%, almost precisely the national mean. That in Teton County, Wyo, is 15%, below the national mean. Wyoming and Idaho in sum have a hispanic population that is about 11% of the total. The other 20-odd counties in that tri-state area have hispanic populations ranging from 2% to 13% bar two. Those two are beyond commuting distance to Jackson Hole and one is a rotten borough with only 900 people living in it. There are only 1,700 people in Driggs, Idaho.
Seriously, I've tried to have this discussion with republicans and they don't get it. I try to point out that the democrats are spotted now with California (55 ev), New York (29 ev), Illinois (20 ev), Michigan (16 ev) , New Jersey (14 ev) and Massachusetts (11 ev). That is 145 electoral votes spotted to the democrats BEFORE the election even begins. That is 53% of the required 270 needed to win. I could use more states, but the point is those states are in no danger of going to the GOP and the democrats barely have to spend money defending them.
Yet the GOP is having to fight like heck to maintain more and more of its states. The battleground states are all states that should be GOP, like VA and FL. And now Texas appears to have a GOP expiration date. Once that state goes, presidential elections will be blowouts. You won't even need to waste the money on them.
If the GOP can't pick up the blatant clues about foreign immigrants going blue, I doubt a subtle concept like blue state diaspora will ever register with them.Replies: @Bugg, @Bill
Simply you cannot hope to win the Electroal College when you are noncompetitive in 145 electoral votes. If Texas, Florida or Virginia go solid blue, it’s over. The combination of other states is too daunting for a GOP candidate. And even for 2016 you allow thr Dem candidate to not have to defend nor even campaign in his(or more likely her) solid blue states.
At the point when the non-White coalition seems to have won a permanent majority, that is when things will get interesting. First, they are not natural allies. Asians, Latinos and Blacks will fight for power internally immediately. And one or more may be willing to ally themselves with Whites.
Second, they( the non-Whites) won't want White leaders, so the Great White Liberals and the Soft White Moderates will be left out in the cold. The Brown people don't want to elect them to anything. And the majority of Whites sure won't.
So you will see multiple parties, based on race, with ever shifting alliances.
Steve's premise was that this Ferguson bruhaha was an attempt to galvanize the black voting base, just like Trayvon was. Whether the Trayvon ploy worked is up for debate, but at least there was a single black candidate they could get behind. If the Dems really think this ploy will work in the midterms, however, then they are dumber than I thought. First of all, any black democratic congressman is likely to get reelected no matter what happens, as they are basically all in majority black districts. So the beneficiaries of Fergoson would have to be white Democratic congressmen and senators seeking reelection. These are Dems elected by a white majority, and they depend heavily on the white swing voters. They will lose far more of these voters because of Ferguson then they will gain black voters. I just don't see black rage being channeled into turning up at the polls to vote some SWPL candidate into office.Replies: @Dave Pinsen
The grass roots support for Darren Wilson – >$370k raised by >9,000 donors in 7 days, versus $243k raised by 8,400 donors in 11 days for the Michael Brown fund – suggests the Ferguson focus may backfire in November.
Blue staters moving to formerly red VA have turned it blue
African American populations make surrounding whites more Republican.
One of the reasons that white people in the Bay Area have moved left is that the Bay Area has lost most of its black population the past 25 years. Some bay area counties even voted for Reagan.
After 20 years of electing Republicans, NYC now has lost so much of its native black population that it elected a Democrat.
Michigan is also going to start moving left as black Detroiters and Flinters move to the South, especially Atlanta and the Carolinas.
The southern states were Democrats do best are Arkansas, Kentucky, and West Virginia. They also have the fewest blacks. Kentucky, 7.8% black, still has a 2/3 dem majority in its state legislature as well as a Democratic governor.
Since 1980, Kentucky has gone for the Republican presidential candidate in every election except 2, Clinton won the state both times, but only by roughly 3 percentage points each time.
I have posted this before. But here goes again. I know something about Jackson Hole, WY. In the 1970s, lots of middle class Whites, as well as 3rd and 4th generation ranchers, lived in the area. Hosted the tourists with good humor.
Starting in the 90s when Californians could sell their beach shacks for half a million, they started moving in in droves. The resultant run up in housing meant old Wyoming families with generational roots could no longer afford their property taxes and sold and left.
The Californians, meanwhile neededtheir helot class, you know.
So here's their solution: Import a bunch of illegal aliens, but house them in Driggs, ID.
I.e.,
tuck their ugly servants safely out of sight behind the mountain of an evening, lest they spoil the view of sunset over the Tetons.
That is to say, liberal pukes from California, spewing hooey about Civil Rights, yada yada, have achieved their nouveau Sundown Towns.
Hypocrites!
And pity the poor old White citizens of Driggs, ID!Replies: @Art Deco, @Lot
Wyoming has the lowest population in the USA. If housing is unaffordable, blame the local republican politicians who won’t allow new development.
A lot of the anti-California migrant crap you see is resentment over the fact that in 1980 their parents paid $50,000 for houses in California now worth $800,000, while the people in the inland West’s parents paid the same $50,000 for houses now worth $125,000.
“Teton County, Wyo, is 15%, below the national mean.”
Yeah, duh, just like I said, hypocritical liberal pukes don’t wan’t there mestizo servants living in Teton County. Oh, sure, they can work there, but get plastered of an eve and sleep it off, go somewhere ELSE! = Sundown Town.
“There are only 1,700 people in Driggs, Idaho.”
Of which, 30 percent is mestizos from Mexico:
http://suburbanstats.org/population/idaho/how-many-people-live-in-driggs
Total population 1660. Latino: 525. 525 divided by 1660 = 31.6%
Consider the White population of Driggs of 1,200: 525 divided by 1,200 = means that the mestizo population of a formerly White middle class town is now 40% of the White population, when it used to be essentially zero. You think that has no effect?
The “some other race” = Indians (feather, not dot). They’ve been there forever, and since American Indians of the Plains Indians tribes really were “here first” but the mestizos from Mexico were not, in the 1970s the Whites in Driggs dealt with their Indians and had something of a stable modus vivendi worked out. But with your pity invested in the invading mestizos, you don’t give a damn about Plains Indians, do you, just like any typical hypocritical liberal?
(That you don’t give a damn about the old Whites who are being overrun — Driggs now has a mestizo pop 40% of the White pop, when it used to be essentially zero — is a given.)
There are about 20 counties in the border region there. All but about four have hispanic shares lower than Teton County, Wyo.
(That you don’t give a damn about the old Whites who are being overrun — Driggs now has a mestizo pop 40% of the White pop, when it used to be essentially zero — is a given.)
It's a small non-urban settlement. If it's like any other settlement of that size, half the 'over-run' whites did not live there a dozen years ago.Replies: @Steve Sailer
“In the long run, the Nixon voters in the South were, as President Obama likes to say, on the right side of history.” – did it leave them alone? did they just get to move on? They may not be interested in this, but its interested in them.
And as for the migration, these are paycheck liberals moving to where its cheaper to live. eventually that ends and they have to confront reality regardless, or else they’d obviously stay where they were.
Nixon had no strategy, he just got a windfall.
But remember, there is nothing sacred about the Two Party System. We can have 3 or more viable parties.
At the point when the non-White coalition seems to have won a permanent majority, that is when things will get interesting. First, they are not natural allies. Asians, Latinos and Blacks will fight for power internally immediately. And one or more may be willing to ally themselves with Whites.
Second, they( the non-Whites) won’t want White leaders, so the Great White Liberals and the Soft White Moderates will be left out in the cold. The Brown people don’t want to elect them to anything. And the majority of Whites sure won’t.
So you will see multiple parties, based on race, with ever shifting alliances.
There’s that heartwarming scene in The Hunt for Red October when a Russian officer marvels at how you can travel throughout the US without papers. U-S-A!
Maybe it would be better if the US did have some internal borders, though. (External borders would be nice too, while we’re at it.) Blue states have made their bed with high costs of living and massive minority populations, and they should bloody well lie in it.
Why should all the pretty spots in the interior be colonized by liberals? (Call me a romantic, but am I the only person who is *angered* by the thought of a state as beautiful as Colorado being lost to post-America?) Doesn’t the dirt gap/affordable family formation thesis imply that conservative whites with families are priced into cheap land in bleak places? Doesn’t it follow that artificial barriers must be erected to allow Middle-Americans to live in the nice parts of Middle America? And why should imported masses of foreigners be able to settle in places that don’t want them, didn’t ask for them, and want to preserve their land for their own people? When did Arizonans decide to become part of Mexico Norte? They didn’t, of course. Ted Kennedy, Emmanuel Coller, LBJ, and friends kindly decided for them.
This is self-determination 101. It’s the essence of the tragedy of the commons, too. People must live with the consequences of their own political and demographic decisions.
If unchecked, liberal domination of the country will result in *all of it* taking the form of contemporary blue-state America: opulent centers of wealth dominated by hypocritical white liberals and neocons, surrounded by squalid Towers of Babel. And don’t think outlying areas will be spared–just look at the Central Valley in California.
Of course, liberal domination will continue unchecked in the blue states. It’s impossible to imagine a patriotic government ever being strong enough to dictate terms to New York, Washington, Hollywood, etc. on the national question. Fortunately, though, I don’t much care what those places do to themselves.
So we should have an internal border with controlled immigration and other sovereign rights. Give it a generation or two, with some gently induced political, cultural, and ethnic disaggregation, and Bob’s your uncle. The red and blue tribes would be able to hate each other to their hearts’ content, but neither would have the opportunity to screw over the other.
Basically, turn as much of the country as possible into the kind polity that the Quebeckers have long sought.
Far-fetched? Sure, but it’s necessary, and it’s not going to get any easier over time.
Increasingly doesn’t matter. Conservatives continue to hold on the the comforting electoral fictions of the past – that America has a sensible white electorate that swings this way or that in response to economic or societal upheavals. The left has imported enough votes to short circuit the mythical backlash, or soon will have, and the new people the elite have elected will always vote for gibsmedat, they don’t care about what happens to the society. Whites too, will cease caring when they realize this is no longer a nation. The Republicans will suffer not just because of the direct votes of sponging aliens, but the secondary effect when their white supporters drop out of the system because they realize there’s nothing left to salvage. That’s already happening.
Anglos vs Jews.
Golf vs chess.
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/08/25/Rep-Luis-Guti-rrez-on-Expected-Executive-Order-Get-Prepared
Obama to make Guiterrez and Adelson very happy.
GOP to suck up to Adelson even more.
Seriously, I've tried to have this discussion with republicans and they don't get it. I try to point out that the democrats are spotted now with California (55 ev), New York (29 ev), Illinois (20 ev), Michigan (16 ev) , New Jersey (14 ev) and Massachusetts (11 ev). That is 145 electoral votes spotted to the democrats BEFORE the election even begins. That is 53% of the required 270 needed to win. I could use more states, but the point is those states are in no danger of going to the GOP and the democrats barely have to spend money defending them.
Yet the GOP is having to fight like heck to maintain more and more of its states. The battleground states are all states that should be GOP, like VA and FL. And now Texas appears to have a GOP expiration date. Once that state goes, presidential elections will be blowouts. You won't even need to waste the money on them.
If the GOP can't pick up the blatant clues about foreign immigrants going blue, I doubt a subtle concept like blue state diaspora will ever register with them.Replies: @Bugg, @Bill
The GOP is not a monolithic entity with a single mind. It is a vast collection of rubes ruled over by Wall St. The fact that the rubes can be gotten to believe the idiocy you are talking about is a feature, not a bug, from the POV of Wall St.
We have that on the authority of yet another of the pseudo-sophisticates on this board.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/21/people-magazine-racist-tatsha-robertson_n_5698095.html
Shoo! A lib rag be racis’.
http://ajw.asahi.com/article/behind_news/social_affairs/AJ201408190050
Stupid PC against free speech in Japan.
Thats what happened with Obama v Clinton in 2008 and we saw it in the Democratic Senate primary here in Jersey in 2013. White candidates Pallone and Holt were more liberal than Booker. Blacks will vote for the black candidate. If they were starting out today, Pallone and Holt would be Republicans.
Maybe it would be better if the US did have some internal borders, though. (External borders would be nice too, while we're at it.) Blue states have made their bed with high costs of living and massive minority populations, and they should bloody well lie in it.
Why should all the pretty spots in the interior be colonized by liberals? (Call me a romantic, but am I the only person who is *angered* by the thought of a state as beautiful as Colorado being lost to post-America?) Doesn't the dirt gap/affordable family formation thesis imply that conservative whites with families are priced into cheap land in bleak places? Doesn't it follow that artificial barriers must be erected to allow Middle-Americans to live in the nice parts of Middle America? And why should imported masses of foreigners be able to settle in places that don't want them, didn't ask for them, and want to preserve their land for their own people? When did Arizonans decide to become part of Mexico Norte? They didn't, of course. Ted Kennedy, Emmanuel Coller, LBJ, and friends kindly decided for them.
This is self-determination 101. It's the essence of the tragedy of the commons, too. People must live with the consequences of their own political and demographic decisions.
If unchecked, liberal domination of the country will result in *all of it* taking the form of contemporary blue-state America: opulent centers of wealth dominated by hypocritical white liberals and neocons, surrounded by squalid Towers of Babel. And don't think outlying areas will be spared--just look at the Central Valley in California.
Of course, liberal domination will continue unchecked in the blue states. It's impossible to imagine a patriotic government ever being strong enough to dictate terms to New York, Washington, Hollywood, etc. on the national question. Fortunately, though, I don't much care what those places do to themselves.
So we should have an internal border with controlled immigration and other sovereign rights. Give it a generation or two, with some gently induced political, cultural, and ethnic disaggregation, and Bob's your uncle. The red and blue tribes would be able to hate each other to their hearts' content, but neither would have the opportunity to screw over the other.
Basically, turn as much of the country as possible into the kind polity that the Quebeckers have long sought.
Far-fetched? Sure, but it's necessary, and it's not going to get any easier over time.Replies: @Steve Sailer
It’s worth paying attention to what the Quebeckers have accomplished.
The blue states are cheaper to live in but the wages are also lower (not a problem for the retirees but a big one for the younger exiles). Places like Idaho and Texas are becoming two tier states with rich people enjoying cheap labor, both by the younger white exiles and also by the Mexicans who are also moving there in droves. The Republican economic ideology encourages this suicidal trend. It’s one more example of the old conumdrum that you can run but you can’t hide.
Red states include 9 of the 10 poorest states and 95 of the 100 poorest counties. Of the 32 states that receive more money from the federal government than they pay in taxes, 27 are red states. Anyone who knows actual facts knows that for decades the blue states have contributed far more than they get back from the Federal government, while the red states take more than they give. For decades, there has been large scale theft of blue state money by red states.
Many of the people posting claim that people are moving to the south to flee liberal policies and high taxes. People move to the South from the North because the winters are warmer. The conservatives try to make a political issue about it. If you talk to the people, they are here because they’re tired of shoveling snow. Good grief. Is everything political?
It’s good to see wealthier, more educated, more tolerant, less superstitious people migrating to poorer, less educated, less tolerant more superstitious parts of the country.
Care to quantify that, from BEA and OMB data?Replies: @Anon
Red states have neither the advantage of location (CA, gateway to Asia) nor first-mover advantage (NY and NJ vis-a-vis just about every major industry in the country, and Illinois as the center of food commodities trading). They are doing extremely well, when you consider their great handicaps, which include, first and foremost, outsized black populations.
The Washington Examiner thinks that MJ is gonna do it for the Dems.
http://washingtonexaminer.com/inhale-marijuana-initiatives-should-keep-senate-democratic/article/2552401
I think the South was a better place before the transplants and immigrants started showing up in large numbers. The region could have been something like Australia or New Zealand without the interference.
Somewhat OT- a story from Saturday night in proudly blue Marin County. The best restaurant for 50 miles has a counter. You never see blacks there, but next to me at the counter is a slim, black guy about 45, sort of an affable Morgan Freeman. His date is a stringy Glenn Close, dressed all in white, who’s logorrheacally detailing everything she knows about bad movies. Morgan is having a great time, laughing and heartily agreeing with Glenn’s ratings. Catty-korner from them is a 70-ish Jewish couple. After listening to Morgan-Glenn for a half-hour, Jewish wife says to Morgan, “you have the loveliest voice.” I can’t really convey the thrill the two Jews obviously felt just to be in this guy’s penumbra, but they had the dancing eyes.
This doesn’t tell us which people from the blue states are moving to the red states. It may well be that the conservative minority in those states is leaving in higher numbers than the libprog majority. Most libprogs I know here in Cali would give up their first born child rather than move to a red state .
Many of the people posting claim that people are moving to the south to flee liberal policies and high taxes. People move to the South from the North because the winters are warmer. The conservatives try to make a political issue about it. If you talk to the people, they are here because they're tired of shoveling snow. Good grief. Is everything political?
It's good to see wealthier, more educated, more tolerant, less superstitious people migrating to poorer, less educated, less tolerant more superstitious parts of the country.Replies: @RonnyJeb, @Art Deco, @Anon
Apparently you haven’t met many of the people moving south. Of course many move south to escape the higher cost of living and the lack of jobs in the Rust Belt. The difference in people is mainly the difference between blacks and whites, and the South has lots of blacks.
Many of the people posting claim that people are moving to the south to flee liberal policies and high taxes. People move to the South from the North because the winters are warmer. The conservatives try to make a political issue about it. If you talk to the people, they are here because they're tired of shoveling snow. Good grief. Is everything political?
It's good to see wealthier, more educated, more tolerant, less superstitious people migrating to poorer, less educated, less tolerant more superstitious parts of the country.Replies: @RonnyJeb, @Art Deco, @Anon
Anyone who knows actual facts knows that for decades the blue states have contributed far more than they get back from the Federal government, while the red states take more than they give. For decades, there has been large scale theft of blue state money by red states.
Care to quantify that, from BEA and OMB data?
What I'd like to see is how much of the excess dollars (taxes added to the Federal Treasury vs benefits taken out) received by the red states are handed to Democratic-voting blacks and illegal aliens. Note that many of these benefits have to be matched to some extent by the states. Would red states be better off if they zeroed out those bennies, thereby triggering an exodus of these moochers to the blue states?
It is a vast collection of rubes ruled over by Wall St
We have that on the authority of yet another of the pseudo-sophisticates on this board.
Yeah, duh, just like I said, hypocritical liberal pukes don't wan't there mestizo servants living in Teton County. Oh, sure, they can work there, but get plastered of an eve and sleep it off, go somewhere ELSE! = Sundown Town.
"There are only 1,700 people in Driggs, Idaho."
Of which, 30 percent is mestizos from Mexico:
http://suburbanstats.org/population/idaho/how-many-people-live-in-driggs
Total population 1660. Latino: 525. 525 divided by 1660 = 31.6%
Consider the White population of Driggs of 1,200: 525 divided by 1,200 = means that the mestizo population of a formerly White middle class town is now 40% of the White population, when it used to be essentially zero. You think that has no effect?
The "some other race" = Indians (feather, not dot). They've been there forever, and since American Indians of the Plains Indians tribes really were "here first" but the mestizos from Mexico were not, in the 1970s the Whites in Driggs dealt with their Indians and had something of a stable modus vivendi worked out. But with your pity invested in the invading mestizos, you don't give a damn about Plains Indians, do you, just like any typical hypocritical liberal?
(That you don't give a damn about the old Whites who are being overrun -- Driggs now has a mestizo pop 40% of the White pop, when it used to be essentially zero -- is a given.)Replies: @Art Deco
Yeah, duh, just like I said, hypocritical liberal pukes don’t wan’t there mestizo servants living in Teton County.
There are about 20 counties in the border region there. All but about four have hispanic shares lower than Teton County, Wyo.
(That you don’t give a damn about the old Whites who are being overrun — Driggs now has a mestizo pop 40% of the White pop, when it used to be essentially zero — is a given.)
It’s a small non-urban settlement. If it’s like any other settlement of that size, half the ‘over-run’ whites did not live there a dozen years ago.
The SWPL invasion of Colorado’s Front Range in the 1990’s completely changed that states dominant culture. Denver transitioned from a gritty, behind-the-times yet affordable blue-collar, libertarian-leaning Cow town to a prissy, over-priced, cutting edge urban playground for DWL nanny-staters with the inflow of tech sector employees and California/West Coast refugees. It was also a major destination point for illegal aliens traveling on dedicated bus lines straight from El Paso, TX along the I-25 pipeline. North Carolina has the same factors going against it that Colorado had twenty years ago, and will be solid blue by 2025, if not sooner.
There are about 20 counties in the border region there. All but about four have hispanic shares lower than Teton County, Wyo.
(That you don’t give a damn about the old Whites who are being overrun — Driggs now has a mestizo pop 40% of the White pop, when it used to be essentially zero — is a given.)
It's a small non-urban settlement. If it's like any other settlement of that size, half the 'over-run' whites did not live there a dozen years ago.Replies: @Steve Sailer
Check out inland Salinas, California, which is full of high rises for the Latino servants who commute to Carmel-by-the-Sea and Santa Cruz.
"Personal care aides" number 1.135 million per the Bureau of Labor Statistics, or 0.8% of the working population; there are about 750,000 others in kindred occupations (generally employed by companies): childcare workers, locker-room attendants, bellhops and concierges, &c. I'll make two wagers: (1) a large share of those employing are infirm elderly and (2) the share of such people in the workforce in 1925 was higher.
Virginia Dep’t of Education says that schools must enroll unaccompanied immigrant children without vaccinations:
http://bristowbeat.com/education/vdoe-memo-said-schools-must-enroll-unaccompanied-immigrant-children-even-without-vaccinations/
So, which of these is for the children? Why should citizens pour money into the vaccine companies for product that can harm when these unaccompanied children don’t have to be vaccinated?
Does the Government know something about vaccinations that it is not telling us?
You do realize that a red state is not comprised of 100 percent red voters? Most states are designated red or blue by small percentage points in an election. My state Missouri voted for Clinton (blue) and Bush (red). It did go with McCain (red), but by less than 3000 votes out of 3 million cast. We do have a democrat governor (Nixon) and senator (McCaskill). But by your definition Missouri is red.
Well I can tell you that red voters are not burning Ferguson, MO down. And I can tell that a certain core constituency of blue voters in Kansas City and St. Louis are a major headache to our two largest metropolitan areas.
If you want to throw out those statistics about 95 percent of the poorest counties being in red states, could you please identify those counties and indicate if those counties are themselves red or blue? I would imagine a large share of those poorest counties are actually blue counties.
PS. If blue staters like yourself are so concerned about our poor counties, why don’t you allow those residents to immigrate to your blue states? After all, you have no problem welcoming poor third worlders to the USA.
PPS. I am touched you are concerned about taxes. Most of us on the right are too. Why don’t you support cutting federal spending programs? As you wrote, 27 of the 32 deadbeat states are red. So if we cut government programs, it will only benefit the blue staters. Yet, it is always the blue staters that fight tooth and nail to preserve these programs. Go ahead, cut them.
I have the sense to stay away from Southern California.
“Personal care aides” number 1.135 million per the Bureau of Labor Statistics, or 0.8% of the working population; there are about 750,000 others in kindred occupations (generally employed by companies): childcare workers, locker-room attendants, bellhops and concierges, &c. I’ll make two wagers: (1) a large share of those employing are infirm elderly and (2) the share of such people in the workforce in 1925 was higher.
“Wyoming has the lowest population in the USA. If housing is unaffordable, blame the local republican politicians who won’t allow new development.”
ROTFLMAO! Teton County (one of only two counties in the state which vote democrat) is unaffordable because billionaires *like* it that way. Keeps out the middle class Whites with their uppity tendencies.
Meanwhile, in the flat-prairie, no-view town of Wheatland, untainted by nouveau riche attracted to Teton County because they wanted a view, far away from the hell they’ve made of California,
you can buy a quite decent 3 bedroom house for 200 K.
http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/1107-22nd-St-Wheatland-WY-82201/119800542_zpid/
You can’t buy a brick shit house in Jackson for less than 400K.
OH, wait! What do I see? A 2 bedroom condo for 110K! Oh. You can only occupy it six weeks out of the year. http://www.jhreassociates.idxco.com/idx/10366/details.php?idxID=468&listingID=14-63
ROTFLMAO! Teton County (one of only two counties in the state which vote democrat) is unaffordable because billionaires *like* it that way. Keeps out the middle class Whites with their uppity tendencies.
Meanwhile, in the flat-prairie, no-view town of Wheatland, untainted by nouveau riche attracted to Teton County because they wanted a view, far away from the hell they've made of California,
you can buy a quite decent 3 bedroom house for 200 K.
http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/1107-22nd-St-Wheatland-WY-82201/119800542_zpid/
You can't buy a brick shit house in Jackson for less than 400K.
OH, wait! What do I see? A 2 bedroom condo for 110K! Oh. You can only occupy it six weeks out of the year. http://www.jhreassociates.idxco.com/idx/10366/details.php?idxID=468&listingID=14-63Replies: @Hard Line Realist
What about Caspar?
http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/4423-E-21st-St-Casper-WY-82609/2105447531_zpid/
I drove past there as well.
“If you want to throw out those statistics about 95 percent of the poorest counties being in red states, could you please identify those counties and indicate if those counties are themselves red or blue? I would imagine a large share of those poorest counties are actually blue counties.”
I bet the majority of the extremely poor underclass counties in red states are People Of Color counties like Mexicans in South Texas, Native American reservations in states like North Dakota, and the Black belt in states like Mississippi.
I doubt the majority of the extremely poor counties in red states are Whitopias.
Care to quantify that, from BEA and OMB data?Replies: @Anon
Care to quantify that, from BEA and OMB data?
What I’d like to see is how much of the excess dollars (taxes added to the Federal Treasury vs benefits taken out) received by the red states are handed to Democratic-voting blacks and illegal aliens. Note that many of these benefits have to be matched to some extent by the states. Would red states be better off if they zeroed out those bennies, thereby triggering an exodus of these moochers to the blue states?
Don’t worry, I found one:
http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/4423-E-21st-St-Casper-WY-82609/2105447531_zpid/
I drove past there as well.
Many of the people posting claim that people are moving to the south to flee liberal policies and high taxes. People move to the South from the North because the winters are warmer. The conservatives try to make a political issue about it. If you talk to the people, they are here because they're tired of shoveling snow. Good grief. Is everything political?
It's good to see wealthier, more educated, more tolerant, less superstitious people migrating to poorer, less educated, less tolerant more superstitious parts of the country.Replies: @RonnyJeb, @Art Deco, @Anon
Red states include 9 of the 10 poorest states and 95 of the 100 poorest counties.
Red states have neither the advantage of location (CA, gateway to Asia) nor first-mover advantage (NY and NJ vis-a-vis just about every major industry in the country, and Illinois as the center of food commodities trading). They are doing extremely well, when you consider their great handicaps, which include, first and foremost, outsized black populations.
“What about Caspar?”
Well, it’s actually spelled Casper, but that’s ok. (Was named for an Indian Wars cavalry lieutenant named Caspar Collins who died fighting to protect pioneers, and over time the misspelling stuck)
Casper used to be the Whitest of Whitopias. Still pretty White but the schools are becoming more and more impacted with Spanish speaking kids of illegals. 5 percent mestizo at the 2000 census, but unquestionably has grown since then. Lots of brown faces at Walmart.
Real estate market: Is pretty active; Peak Oil means that Wyoming’s energy resources will only continue to become more in demand in the future, and Wyoming has lots, including coal, natural gas and uranium. Pay for a White man willing to work long hours on the drilling rigs, 100K a year with some experience, when you get to be a tool pusher or directional driller. If you’re safety-conscious and have a high school diploma, they’ll train.
Shirley Basin is a world-class find of uranium, about forty miles from Casper. Fukushima collapsed the uranium market, but I expect it will come back — no other choice. (Except of course, my favorite, thorium-burning liquid-fluoride-cooled reactors. Oh, and WY has thorium out the yin-yang, too. It’s found wherever coal is.)
Lots of fairly new housing for the middle class in Bar Nunn and Evansville.
http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/4845-Rabbitbrush-Dr-Bar-Nunn-WY-82601/92322151_zpid/
However, I did notice the impact of oil production.
@Ted
Red states include 9 of the 10 poorest states and 95 of the 100 poorest counties. Of the 32 states that receive more money from the federal government than they pay in taxes, 27 are red states…For decades, there has been large scale theft of blue state money by red states.
Well, sure, Republican voters, like all voters, want more stuff without wanting to pay for it.
In any case, it’s basic truth of human geography that the most value gets added in major metropolitan areas. That’s where the most intensive economic activity takes place. So it’s not fair to compare the tax revenues of metropolitan Democratic strongholds with those of rural Republican counties, even on a per capita basis. That’s like saying that the worker with a million dollar piece of capital equipment is inherently more productive than the one with shovel. Maybe he is…or maybe he got assigned the nice equipment on the company’s duty roster that day.
Suppose, as a thought experiment, that all Republicans or conservatives had their own country and all liberals/Democrats did too. Suppose further that these two countries were fully independent of each other politically and economically–autarkic, basically. Keep in mind that all of those middle- and upper-class suburban Republicans who live and work in blue states would now have their human capital retained in the “home” country. Keep in mind also that further rural “brain drain” would drain within the home country rather than being lost to NYC or SF or whatever. Under these circumstances, it seems likely that some cities in the “conservative” country (population 150 million or so) would become great economic powerhouses and net tax generators in their own right.
Put differently, you seem to be of Richard Florida’s opinion that liberalism makes cities rich. I think it’s more then case that liberalism follows wealth (through self-selection and/or cultural change), in which case you can’t attribute the great tax revenue generation of big cities to the liberalism of those who inhabit them, at least insofar as that liberalism is exogenous to the internal development of urban life.
It’s good to see wealthier, more educated, more tolerant, less superstitious people migrating to poorer, less educated, less tolerant more superstitious parts of the country.
There are a couple problems with this. First, does anyone in the world want his community taken over by people who despise him and his way of life?
Second, part of what makes a nation a nation is that one cares about one’s fellow citizens whether or not they are, to borrow Marco Rubio’s aides’ phrase, “star performers.” As it happens, I took a wrong turn yesterday and drove clear through the poorest county in America, per a recent National Review feature. Do I have much in common with the modal inhabitant of Owsley County, Kentucky? No, not really. But so what? They’re Americans, which is more than can be said for a lot of residents of Chicagoland, where I live.
Finally, the funny thing about modern liberalism is that it contains a kind of death wish. This finds its greatest expression in mass immigration. Thus, the wealthy, educated, cosmopolitan, and secular folks you praise are importing millions of foreigners who are often none of those things. In the course of destroying the Right liberalism will destroy itself, and the winner will not be Red America nor even traditional Blue America (e.g. Midwestern social democrats), but non-America and our apolitical (because corrupt and opportunistic) overclass.
I bet the majority of the extremely poor underclass counties in red states are People Of Color counties like Mexicans in South Texas, Native American reservations in states like North Dakota, and the Black belt in states like Mississippi.
I doubt the majority of the extremely poor counties in red states are Whitopias.Replies: @Steve Sailer
There are some very poor white counties like Owsley, KY, but they tend to be depopulated. Owsley County has less than 5,000 residents.
Well, it's actually spelled Casper, but that's ok. (Was named for an Indian Wars cavalry lieutenant named Caspar Collins who died fighting to protect pioneers, and over time the misspelling stuck)
Casper used to be the Whitest of Whitopias. Still pretty White but the schools are becoming more and more impacted with Spanish speaking kids of illegals. 5 percent mestizo at the 2000 census, but unquestionably has grown since then. Lots of brown faces at Walmart.
Real estate market: Is pretty active; Peak Oil means that Wyoming's energy resources will only continue to become more in demand in the future, and Wyoming has lots, including coal, natural gas and uranium. Pay for a White man willing to work long hours on the drilling rigs, 100K a year with some experience, when you get to be a tool pusher or directional driller. If you're safety-conscious and have a high school diploma, they'll train.
Shirley Basin is a world-class find of uranium, about forty miles from Casper. Fukushima collapsed the uranium market, but I expect it will come back -- no other choice. (Except of course, my favorite, thorium-burning liquid-fluoride-cooled reactors. Oh, and WY has thorium out the yin-yang, too. It's found wherever coal is.)
Lots of fairly new housing for the middle class in Bar Nunn and Evansville.
http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/4845-Rabbitbrush-Dr-Bar-Nunn-WY-82601/92322151_zpid/Replies: @Hard Line Realist
I noticed when I was there recently. I saw only one black person, and the Hispanic waitress I saw at the Thai restaurant downtown was one of those fairly white hispanics. Only one Asian in the Thai restaurant as well, and the menu had lots of Chinese dishes on it.
However, I did notice the impact of oil production.
I guess I don’t have an encyclopedic mind for stats, but I’d wager a a guess that the percent black population of most American States has declined over the past few decades.
Except for the South. If there is a an American state that has an increased percentage of blacks, or even an increased absolute number over that time I an unaware of it. All the growth for them has been in the South.
Looking back the current trends seem to start in my mind in 1980. Obviously there was Reagan but is sure seems like a lot of other stuff started happening in hindsight.
“There are some very poor white counties like Owsley, KY, but they tend to be depopulated. Owsley County has less than 5,000 residents.”
I know they exist, but some people underestimate the percentage of Nonwhites in red states when talking about poverty in red states.
The states with some of the highest percentage of Hispanics, African Americans, and Native Americans in the country tend to be red states.
For example among the top 10 states with the highest percentage of people who self identify themselves as Native American, 7 of them are red states.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Native_Americans_in_the_United_States#Distribution_by_U.S._state
How many self identifying Native Americans in Oklahoma for example do you think are part of the middle class ? Probably not many. No doubt they are great contributors to the poverty rate in Oklahoma.
Here is a list of the poorest counties in the USA. If anyone has the time, click through and then check the demographics. For example, Starr County, TX, is listed as the 3rd lowest per capita income county in the nation at $7,069 per head. But its demographically 95% hispanic.
I haven’t checked them all out, but it looks like a number of them will be majority NAM counties. In other words, they are full of blue state voters.
I haven't checked them all out, but it looks like a number of them will be majority NAM counties. In other words, they are full of blue state voters.Replies: @Steve Sailer
Four clusters:
Indian reservations
Mexican border Hispanics
Black belt blacks
Coal belt whites
Huh? I think the whole point here was that blue states are not cheaper to live in, though the rest of what you say is true.
“Here is a list of the poorest counties in the USA. If anyone has the time, click through and then check the demographics. For example, Starr County, TX, is listed as the 3rd lowest per capita income county in the nation at $7,069 per head. But its demographically 95% hispanic.”
That is similar to the per capita income as the average Iraqi and only slightly higher than the per capita income of the average Paraguayan.
But they also have a lower per capita income than the average Brazilian, Albanian, Tongan, Bosnian, Ukrainian, Colombian, Ecuadorian, Peruvian, etc.
The Californians, meanwhile needed their helot class, you know.
So here’s their solution: Import a bunch of illegal aliens, but house them in Driggs, ID.
I.e., tuck their ugly servants safely out of sight behind the mountain of an evening, lest they spoil the view of sunset over the Tetons.
What do you mean, ugly? Right now, I am flipping through a liberal magazine from 1972 with cartoons about race relations in America. White collar white people are the ugly ones, and fat from working at desk jobs, and pale from spending so much time indoors. Illegal aliens and minorities are young, strong, vital, tanned from working outside (plus their natural pigmentation), and in good shape.
How times have changed!
Our very blue-state friends from California brought there children as well, naturally, and while still blue themselves (though not as much) their children are now very red-state.
Ted – “Anyone who knows actual facts knows that for decades the blue states have contributed far more than they get back from the Federal government, while the red states take more than they give. For decades, there has been large scale theft of blue state money by red states.
Many of the people posting claim that people are moving to the south to flee liberal policies and high taxes. People move to the South from the North because the winters are warmer.”
How much of that money being paid to red states is being paid to blue-state retirees who moved to where the weather was better? Or to their doctors? Social Security and Medicare are pretty big parts of the Federal budget.
It’s worth paying attention to what the Quebeckers have accomplished.
Mau-mauing the flak catchers in the rest of Canada?
“Four clusters:
Indian reservations
Mexican border Hispanics
Black belt blacks
Coal belt whites”
If Hussein Obama was not so anti-coal, I wonder if he would have won the majority of the coal belt White vote.
The GOP has done a good job of convincing coal belt Whites that they are the party of pro-coal.
So it seems (according to the map here) that the Deep South/Tidewater went Wallace, Greater Appalachia (and parts of Yankeedom/the Left Coast) went Humphrey, and everyone else went Nixon.
Mau-mauing the flak catchers in the rest of Canada?Replies: @Steve Sailer
“Mau-mauing the flak catchers in the rest of Canada?”
A good offense can be the best defense.
Republicans have held the Kentucky Senate for the past 15 years. Currently, they hold a 23-14 seat edge with one independent who usually votes Republican. Outside of a few flaming liberals from Louisville and Lexington most Kentucky Democrats are fairly conservative union members who would probably be Republicans in any other state. Our primary system is heavily skewed towards protecting the Democrats.
Since 1980, Kentucky has gone for the Republican presidential candidate in every election except 2, Clinton won the state both times, but only by roughly 3 percentage points each time.