Red States Gaining an Economic & Demographic Edge

[Cow Poke]

Red States Gaining an Economic & Demographic Edge

The political and cultural war between red and blue America may not be settled in our lifetimes, but it’s clear which side is gaining ground in economic and demographic terms. In everything from new jobs—including new technology employment—fertility rates, population growth, and migration, it’s the red states that increasingly hold the advantage.

Perhaps the most surprising development is on the economic front. Over the past decade, the national media, and much of academia, have embraced the notion that the future belonged to the high-tax, high-regulation economies clustered on the East and West Coasts. The red states have been widely dismissed, in the words of the New York Times, as the land of the “left behind.”

Yet the left-behind are catching up, as economic momentum shifts away from coastal redoubts toward traditionally GOP-leaning states. Just a few years ago, states like California, Massachusetts, and New York held their own, and then some, in measurements of income growth from the Bureau of Economic Analysis. Now the fastest growth is concentrated in the Sunbelt and Great Plains. Texans’ income in the latest 2019 BEA estimates was up 4.2 percent, well above California’s 3.6 percent and twice New York’s 2.1 percent. The largest jumps—and this may matter a lot in 2020—took place in the Dakotas, Nebraska, and Iowa.

I thought this was not the case. Comments?

Only serious discussion and actual sources, please. If you're just going to parrot talking points, please do so elsewhere.

[demi-conservative]

Of course, changes in Washington could alter this trajectory. Widespread endorsement by Democratic candidates to ban fracking in places like Texas, North Dakota, Ohio, West Virginia, and Pennsylvania could drive these states into recession. In Texas alone, by some estimates, 1 million jobs would vaporize, while nationwide, according to a Chamber of Commerce report, a full ban would cost 14 million jobs—far more than the 8 million lost in the Great Recession.

Fracking is financially unsustainable and environmentally disastrous. The companies are not profitable and rely on continually getting billions in loans.

Maybe ol' Uncle Sam will subsidise it all.

[Starlight]

Just a few years ago, states like California, Massachusetts, and New York held their own, and then some, in measurements of income growth from the Bureau of Economic Analysis. Now the fastest growth is concentrated in the Sunbelt and Great Plains. Texans’ income in the latest 2019 BEA estimates was up 4.2 percent, well above California’s 3.6 percent and twice New York’s 2.1 percent. The largest jumps—and this may matter a lot in 2020—took place in the Dakotas, Nebraska, and Iowa.

So the claim is that a few red states had a good year last year, but the writer admits that in general they haven't had many good years in recent years compared to some blue states?

If one good year for red states proves red state policies are the best, what does several good years for blue states prove?

[Cow Poke]

So the claim is that a few red states had a good year last year, but the writer admits that in general they haven't had many good years in recent years compared to some blue states?

If one good year for red states proves red state policies are the best, what does several good years for blue states prove?

It all depends on the timeline, Star --- if there are several "good years for blue states" followed by a "good year for red states", there may be a trend worth watching.

[Sparko]

Yet the left-behind are catching up,

Gee I guess the left-behind are really right-behind.

[demi-conservative]

Red States Gaining an Economic & Demographic Edge

How is this a good thing in the long term? 'Demographic edge' means people are streaming in who will turn the state blue, while 'economic edge' is from fracking.

[Starlight]

It all depends on the timeline, Star --- if there are several "good years for blue states" followed by a "good year for red states", there may be a trend worth watching.

If it were to happen, sure. The OP mentions only 2019 as the good year, and most of that 2019 data is still preliminary data that will be revised as it continues to be gathered.

[Cow Poke]

If it were to happen, sure. The OP mentions only 2019 as the good year, and most of that 2019 data is still preliminary data that will be revised as it continues to be gathered.

Correct.

[JimL]

How is this a good thing in the long term? 'Demographic edge' means people are streaming in who will turn the state blue, while 'economic edge' is from fracking.

That's how it's a good thing.

[Bald Ape]

Spot the fallacy

Let's play, "spot the fallacy"

I earned a 1.0 GPA first quarter and a 1.1 GPA second quarter
My roommate earned a 3.0 GPA first quarter and a 3.2 GPA second quarter
My GPA improved 10%, which is more than my roommate's 6.7% improvement in GPA.
Based on Q1 vs Q2 results, I'm gaining an academic edge over my roommate.

Laughable, right? Done rolling your eyes? Now consider: the ONLY numbers cited by OP fit this exact mold:

Texans’ income in the latest 2019 BEA estimates was up 4.2 percent, well above California’s 3.6 percent and twice New York’s 2.1 percent.

Note how these would describe a hypothetical where not only was Texas performing considerable worse than CA and NY in both 2018 and 2019; but where it was actually falling further behind from 2018 to 2019 (in terms of dollars of income per year).

Hypothetical:

• Texans average $10,000 per year in 2018 and $10,420 per year in 2019 (increase = +$420)
• Californians average $50,000 per year in 2018 and $51,800 per year in 2019 (increase = +$1,800)
• New Yorkers average $100,000 per year in 2018 and $102,100 in 2019 (increase = +$2,100)

By OP logic, even though Texans made an average of $40,000 less than Californians in 2018 and $41,400 less (i.e. falling further behind) than Californians in 2019, they'd be "gaining the economical edge" over Californians. Because hey: a 4.2 percent increase is better than a 3.6 percent increase. Right?

[Bald Ape]

Yeesh - as if possible - it gets worse. This appears to be the source of OPs data:

https://www.bea.gov/system/files/spi1219.png

2019 Q2 vs 2019 Q3. That is what is being compared. The change from one quarter to the next. No, not even that. The PERCENTAGE change from one quarter to the next.

With this level of logical fortitude, OP might literally be taking a BEA chart meant to show, "Red states experience greater seasonal fluctuations in income, relatively speaking, than blue states" and contorting it into "WOW!! Red states are Gaining an Economic Edge over Blue states!!"

[Sparko]

Yeesh - as if possible - it gets worse. This appears to be the source of OPs data:

https://www.bea.gov/system/files/spi1219.png

2019 Q2 vs 2019 Q3. That is what is being compared. The change from one quarter to the next. No, not even that. The PERCENTAGE change from one quarter to the next.

With this level of logical fortitude, OP might literally be taking a BEA chart meant to show, "Red states experience greater seasonal fluctuations in income, relatively speaking, than blue states" and contorting it into "WOW!! Red states are Gaining an Economic Edge over Blue states!!"

You also need to consider in many of the blue states, like Cali and NY, the cost of living is so high that someone making $50,000/year only has the same buying power as someone making $20,000 in most red states. For example, a nice 3 bedroom ranch home in southern California will run your close to a million, where in Dallas, you can buy the same quality/size home for less than $200,000.

[simplicio]

You also need to consider in many of the blue states, like Cali and NY, the cost of living is so high that someone making $50,000/year only has the same buying power as someone making $20,000 in most red states. For example, a nice 3 bedroom ranch home in southern California will run your close to a million, where in Dallas, you can buy the same quality/size home for less than $200,000.

Can't speak for California, but New York statistics are weighted or skewed by downstate areas like NYC. the median home cost is is much less in western New York than in Dallas. https://www.bestplaces.net/cost_of_l...w_york/buffalo

I read an article a while ago, which I can't find, which argued that the cost of living statistics don't really reflect the reality for most Americans. 80-20 rule (a fraction of the population cause a bulk of the effect, applies. Sort out the areas like Silicon Valley and Manhattan (I was going to list Queens as affordable, but then I looked it up), account for homes bought long enough ago, perks of living in an area, etc. Unfunded pensions hang over a lot of so called fiscal conservative states, as well as blue states, NY is healthier than average in that regard.

One trend is that growing cities are having a housing crunch. Some cities are so expensive a middle class income is not sufficient find housing in the area.

[Sparko]

Can't speak for California, but New York statistics are weighted or skewed by downstate areas like NYC. the median home cost is is much less in western New York than in Dallas. https://www.bestplaces.net/cost_of_l...w_york/buffalo

I read an article a while ago, which I can't find, which argued that the cost of living statistics don't really reflect the reality for most Americans. 80-20 rule (a fraction of the population cause a bulk of the effect, applies. Sort out the areas like Silicon Valley and Manhattan (I was going to list Queens as affordable, but then I looked it up), account for homes bought long enough ago, perks of living in an area, etc. Unfunded pensions hang over a lot of so called fiscal conservative states, as well as blue states, NY is healthier than average in that regard.

One trend is that growing cities are having a housing crunch. Some cities are so expensive a middle class income is not sufficient find housing in the area.

Just try looking on realtor.com for housing in various areas. I linked to two of them. Both in large metro areas so the comparison was valid. I didn't compare a large metro area to some podunk farming village in upstate New York. I compared LA to Dallas. Where the quality of life and various amenities are comparable. You can buy a house in Dallas for a 10th of the price of a similar house in LA. So if we are talking standards of living and economic growth, a 10% growth in Dallas would be need to be compared to a 100% growth in LA (or thereabouts, real estate isn't everything) to be equal.

[demi-conservative]

The companies are not profitable and rely on continually getting billions in loans.

Maybe ol' Uncle Sam will subsidise it all.

Oil prices plunging, time for a yuge bailout.