Top 5 inbound states compared to the top 5 outbound states. Mark Perry sees a pattern. Do you?
http://www.aei.org/publication/blog/carpe-diem/
http://www.aei.org/publication/blog/carpe-diem/
Migration Patterns Within The USA
- Thread starter Ponca Dan
- Start date
One of the issues that I noticed in Arizona when I lived there is these people flee states like California and then they come in and lecture people about not being liberal and vote for people that are exactly like the ones that messed up the states they left. I don't get that type of thinking.
One puzzling thing I found with this article. Near the bottom he points out that the Top 5 Inbound states are controlled by Republicans, while 4 out of 5 Of the Top 5 Outbound States are run by Democrats. The Republicans in these states apparently tend to favor smaller government intrusion and lower taxes. These states seem to develop a small government mindset as opposed to the states ruled by Democrats. So - correct me if I’m wrong - what happens to these small government minded local politicians when they advance through the ranks and get to the federal level, become US Congressmen or Senators? Why do they become advocates for larger government intrusion in our lives when they get to DC? What causes the change?
Because at the state level the politician has aspirations to become bigger and thus doesn't work to consolidate power. Once you reach the federal level, all that remains is to consolidate power. There is no next level to get to.
No. When they get into the US congress they find out that you can keep your position and make your family and friends rich for generations by playing ball with K Street. There is a reason these people who get full retirement after just a short period time fight tooth and nail to keep their positions even when they are to old to feed themselves and it's not patriotism.
Last edited:
Really? Take a look at those criteria he is correlating against - to what extent are they redundant? Nice job cherry picking in this analysis.
Do they? By what measure? Can you cite anything outside of the highly redundant business focused metrics the author offers? Is there greater personal freedoms in top states than in lower states?
No, David, I am speculating solely on the metrics posited by the links in Mark Perry’s article. Greater “personal freedom?” I don’t know. Mark does not necessarily call one set of states “top,” and one set “bottom.” That would be your interpretation, not his. He is just pointing to a trend that states whose governments are controlled by Democrats, states with higher taxes and more government attempts to regulate businesses, are facing outmigration, while states with lower taxes and less intrusion - controlled by Republicans - are enjoying inmigration. He gives his opinion and leaves you to draw your own. What would your opinion be? Do you recognize the trend, and if so, to what would you ascribe it? I thought Perry made sense. Do you disagree? I would love to know what you think.
My personal opinion is the net migration metric is pretty arbitrary and subject to many causes. To draw a partisan conclusion from it is a stretch - especially when equal weighting overlapping criteria (tax rates, right to work, and a Forbes list which uses those criteria among others).
BTW: Mark uses the work top 52 times in this article. The word bottom is used only 7. That is not my interpretation, those are his words.
On your question of intrusiveness - the Republicans win hands down IMO on being the Nanny state in individual behavior terms - from the debate on cannabis to what happens among consenting adults in private. The Democrats lead in over engineering the social safety net. Both are #winning (in the same way that @JonnyVito is #winning) in this regard.
Apparently I misunderstood your use of the words “top” and “bottom.” I don’t agree that he was being particularly partisan when he was saying “top five inbound” and “top five outbound.” He was just reporting the findings and not attaching a particular moral value. There is no need for you to be alarmed. While there is no escaping the fact that we are ALL partisan to one degree or another, I would put Mark Perry near the bottom of the list of people who participate in partisan politics. One of the things I like most about him is his attempt to be objective. If you read him dispassionately rather than with a jaundiced eye, attempting to refute what he’s saying before he gets it out, I think you will appreciate him. The last thing he attempts to do is get into a pissing match, calling names back and forth, with the conversation becoming increasingly vitriolic. That’s not his style.
I agree with this comment 100%! That’s why I hate them all, and am baffled why you chose a side when you know that side is just as horrible as the other, just in a different way.
Damn do I need to pay rent for the space I am taking up in your head?
I am going to have to think about how I come across in this medium. I do not have a side. True, I am very antiTrump - not because he is Republican but because he is a smelly turd in the Washington punch bowl.
