Tuesday, May 09, 2017


I recommend this piece by Joel Kotkin. I call particular attention to this passage:
Overall, domestic migration trends affirm Trump-friendly locales. In 2016, states that supported Trump gained a net of 400,000 domestic migrants from states that supported Clinton. This includes a somewhat unnoticed resurgence of migration to smaller cities, areas often friendly to Trump and the GOP. Domestic migration has accelerated to cities between with populations between half a million and a million people, while it’s been negative among those with populations over a million. The biggest out-migration now takes place in Los Angeles, Chicago, and New York.

Of course, for the blue cognoscenti, there’s only one explanation for such moves: Those people are losers and idiots. This is part of the new blue snobbery: Bad people, including the poor, are moving out to benighted places like Texas but the talented are flocking in. Yet, like so many comfortable assertions, this one does not stand scrutiny. It’s the middle class, particularly in their childbearing years, who, according to IRS data, are moving out of states like California and into ones like Texas. Since 2000, the Golden State has seen a net outflow of $36 billion dollars from migrants.
Our kids are approaching adulthood and they will have decisions to make on where to make their lives. It's possible they will choose to remain here in the Twin Cities, but will the Twin Cities be a place that makes sense for them? It made sense to us to move here 25 years ago; we were living in Chicago and this seemed like a better place to make a life. On balance, we're happy to be here. Our government is simultaneously imperious and frivolous, but we've been living off the seed corn for a long time. I don't know if that will be possible for our children.

There's a whole lot more at the link; despite his observations that trends may favor red states, Kotkin, a man of the Left, sees a possibility that the blue states could still rule, especially if Donald Trump continues to falter. But it won't be a happy rule.


Gino said...

The blues are determined to rule over the reds. In a democracy, this couldn't happen for long. This is why so many reds prefer the decree over the election process.

The blues will rule in the end. It's their destiny. But another destiny awaits the generation they leave behind, and that one will likely involved the pitchfork dance.

Bike Bubba said...

Regarding blues and reds, two things come to mind. First of all, the states around California have become progressively more liberal as Californians have fled--Colorado is a great example. So it appears that many/most liberals fleeing liberal states are not cluing in to why they fled.

Also, when my mom & stepdad visited Croatia, one thing that was said to them was that the vicious civil war was as much a result of the state existing more or less to enrich Belgrade and Serbia as it was over lingering ethnic and religious tensions. I can't vouch for how much the "calls for Croatian autonomy" around 1991 and such were consistent with this, but it does strike me that the left increasingly seeks to pillage others in this way. It might not end well, as Gino hints.