No Evidence of California Exodus Or 'Millionaire Flight', UC Research Project Finds (sfgate.com) 451
Charlotte Web shares a report from SFGate: Despite the popular belief that residents are fleeing California, there is not in fact a statewide exodus, new research out of the University of California finds. For one, while residents are moving out of state, they are not doing so at "unusual rates." Similarly, the research found no evidence of "millionaire flight" from California and notes that the state continues to attract as much venture capital as all other U.S. states combined, despite the recent exodus of Hewlett-Packard and Oracle. The report did reveal net migration out of San Francisco during the pandemic. However, about two-thirds of people who left the city remained in the Bay Area, while 80% stayed in California, which is consistent with earlier trends...
A recent survey by UC San Diego, included in the project, found that the percentage of Californians who plan to leave the state has remained static for two years. In fact, only 23% of California voters said they were seriously considering leaving the state, which is lower than the 24% who said the same in a 2019 survey conducted by UC Berkeley. [...] The myth of "millionaire flight" from California, the project also found, is just that -- a myth. Affluent Californians were actually more satisfied with the direction the state is going and very likely to believe it will be better when their children grow up. Likewise, an analysis of almost two decades of Franchise Tax Board data by Stanford University and Cornell University found that there has been no millionaire flight from California, despite recent tax increases levied on higher earners. "From housing affordability to post-pandemic recovery, California is faced with solving a daunting number of existential challenges. To help inform those important public discussions, UC assembled many of the state's top researchers to provide a data-driven understanding of California's population trends," said UC Regent John A. Perez in a press release.
"Sliced and diced by geography, race, income and other demographic factors, our efforts have produced a clearer picture of who perceives California as the Golden State versus a failed state," he continued. "The empirical data will be, at once, disappointing to those who want to write California's obituary, as well as a call to action for policymakers to address the challenges that have caused some to lose faith in the California Dream."
A recent survey by UC San Diego, included in the project, found that the percentage of Californians who plan to leave the state has remained static for two years. In fact, only 23% of California voters said they were seriously considering leaving the state, which is lower than the 24% who said the same in a 2019 survey conducted by UC Berkeley. [...] The myth of "millionaire flight" from California, the project also found, is just that -- a myth. Affluent Californians were actually more satisfied with the direction the state is going and very likely to believe it will be better when their children grow up. Likewise, an analysis of almost two decades of Franchise Tax Board data by Stanford University and Cornell University found that there has been no millionaire flight from California, despite recent tax increases levied on higher earners. "From housing affordability to post-pandemic recovery, California is faced with solving a daunting number of existential challenges. To help inform those important public discussions, UC assembled many of the state's top researchers to provide a data-driven understanding of California's population trends," said UC Regent John A. Perez in a press release.
"Sliced and diced by geography, race, income and other demographic factors, our efforts have produced a clearer picture of who perceives California as the Golden State versus a failed state," he continued. "The empirical data will be, at once, disappointing to those who want to write California's obituary, as well as a call to action for policymakers to address the challenges that have caused some to lose faith in the California Dream."
psy-op (Score:5, Interesting)
Someone stands to profit from scaring people into imagining that Californians are flooding their states. This has always been the case but now it is a more believable lie. Follow the money and you'll find the real villains.
Follow the clickbait (Score:2)
The internet is about eyes and adverts (the reason the Slashdot editors proudly shit all over a former tech site).
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Sorry. I live in CA. That article is a load of garbage; it's a PR piece literally funded by CA to make CA look good.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Sorry, I also live in CA. I see shit from conservative sources all the time that blatantly defy the reality around me. This actually makes some sense.
I mean, people are either fleeing the state in mass and our state's population is significantly shrinking or the housing prices are too high. Pick one because both together defy economics as we know it.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You don't need "right-wing media" telling you California is failing when you have to dodge human shit in the streets of San Francisco.
Re:psy-op (Score:4, Funny)
Sounds like another myth. Everyone knows that the homeless people in Texas do not poop.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
There are a whole lot less homeless in Texas. I could argue this is because of climate, or because of the policies within the state, or because of the cultures within the state.
It won't change the fact that there are a lot more homeless in California than Texas. And homeless in California are notoriously badly behaved compared to most of their brethren in other states. Needles everywhere, human excrement everywhere. Even in NY, where they do piss and shit on the streets, they don't do it in a way where norm
Re:psy-op (Score:4, Interesting)
I live in Los Angeles, and you are obviously just listening to propaganda.
The homeless situation is pretty terrible, but the constant complaints about "shit and needles" is just wrong. The trash is 90% food containers and plastic bags and a surprising number of plastic motor oil cans, there is also a lot of boxes, pallettes, furniture, and huge mounds of clothes, though there could be some claim that since they are pushing this into piles about their tents they are possessions and not trash.
I have to walk by the encampments and have NEVER seen a needle, except exactly one that was currently in use by one of them. Needles I think are valuable to them and they would not leave them in the street. I have seen a couple of those orange tips that go on the needles however, I don't know enough whether those can't be put back on the needle or the person is just stupid to keep the needle without the cap. Shit is also difficult to see, and could be from dogs. If they can't get in a bathroom they must be climbing the embankment.
There was a huge deal about a cleanup of Echo Park that netted 39 tons (!) of garbage. They made a big point about finding 30 pounds of "sharps", so .03% of the total, and only after a good deal of prodding was it revealed that "sharps" includes any flat or cut metal, glass, knives, scissors, and an awful lot of stuff that is not "needles".
Re: (Score:2)
I live in Los Angeles too, and you're completely full of it. And SF is provably even worse than LA
Re: psy-op (Score:5, Informative)
Re: psy-op (Score:4, Insightful)
He didn't say that at all.
If your making shit up to disprove a point, it might just be easier to concede.
Re: psy-op (Score:4, Informative)
Where were you? I really have seen exactly zero needles, despite seeing an absolute mountain of garbage from the homeless. I thought maybe the encampment near me (Venice underpass) was some kind of drug free one but I literally saw a guy shooting up so that is not it. I just don't understand this repeated chant of needles! Needles! Needles! I did see a photo once of a box of needles with the orange cap still on, I think from the echo Park cleanup. But these were not used. I think you also missed my complaint that they called all the metal they found "sharps" which seems to me to be trying to confirm people's expectations.
The dangerous thing in the encampments is food garbage. There is no reason to make up fantasies to say this is bad.
Re: (Score:3)
My guess, you're too used to see them. When you're used to something, you get desensitized to it.
To an outsider, those things jump at them because they're out of the norm. To someone who experienced them for a long time, it's a norm. And you don't notice the norm. It's the norm after all. It's the exceptions to the norm that you notice. That's how we're biologically wired.
Nonsense (Score:3)
Nonsense, outsiders don't go to the shit parts of town. When some one goes to LA they go to Disneyland or something like that, they DONT go visit the homeless encampments. Likewise with people briefly in town to work.
Re: (Score:3)
There are homeless on Venice beach. Like right behind the famous Gold's Gym that I went to check out. Hell, they're even there on street view:
https://www.google.com/maps/@3... [google.com]
More camps on Skid Row that I drove past:
https://www.google.com/maps/@3... [google.com]
Frankly this should be extremely embarrassing. There's always going to be someone crazy or who fell through the cracks, but I've never see anything like this in another developed country. Of course that is not to say that this is the "liberals" problem, republica
Re: (Score:3)
That isn't true. For starters we have housing vouchers, food stamps, and medical cards for the poor and republicans compose more of the earning middle class who pay the bulk of the taxes. There is a problem here though, these programs penalize earning and reduce or eliminate benefits if you earn any income. They also make up most of the donations to the charitable religious
Re: (Score:3)
Why is that? Do you guys give the drugs away for free up there?
Re:psy-op (Score:5, Informative)
I think it's a combination of things — policies that drive the homeless to leave and a general lack of shelter that results in homeless people freezing to death. Texas is simply homeless-hostile. For some hard numbers:
Homeless people in at least some parts of Texas reportedly die at a rate of 25 per 1,000 annually (pre-COVID), [dallasnews.com] which is 3x the rate of the general population.
Homeless people in California die at about 6 per 1,000, which is within the margin of error of the general population.
Re:psy-op (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm in complete agreement. In my country, our government made a call in 1970s that anyone who wants an apartment to live in will get one with government and regional government assistance. We have basically no homeless, a small handful of cases that we do are overwhelmingly people who simply cannot tolerate living inside. Those are usually people who have extreme drug addiction and violence problem, and cannot tolerate the fact that free housing comes with some limitations on drug usage and violence. They bust a few apartments and then live outside. The rest just exist on social assistance from the government.
Fun part is, the reason this decision was made was raw math. Relevant bureaucracy calculated how much it cost government to mitigate against problems caused by homeless vs just providing them with housing and basic social assistance. Latter was determined to be meaningfully cheaper, so measures were implemented to do so. We've had a lot less problems with things like street crime ever since, and far less costs associated with mitigating damage caused by it.
Re:psy-op (Score:4, Insightful)
to some people, the idea that someone "undeserving" might get something for free is so deeply offensive that they'd rather spend 100 times the amount of money on police and prisons and mitigation instead, and then still complain about the free meals they're getting courtesy of the state.
Re:psy-op (Score:4, Insightful)
Several areas on the West Coast spend in excess of $75K PER HOMELESS PERSON.
Yet their homeless problem continues growing.
And it's not just a matter of new problem cases replacing solved social issues.
Simply throwing money and "free, free, free", providing "safe" shoot-up sights, etc doesn't fix the problem. It just perpetuates it.
Re:psy-op (Score:4, Insightful)
It's not about spending more money. It's about spending less in smart ways.
Re: (Score:3)
Do the homeless people all come from those areas of the West Coast? Or is it that they come from everywhere else and are despate for somewhere where survival is easier? If everywhere spent in excess of $75K per homeless person, would the problem be growing as much in those West Coast areas? There's probably an element of climate too, but that said, it amazed me to see the amount of homelessness in Ottawa in the middle of winter (I haven't been to places in the US with similar climates, but clearly people
Re: (Score:3)
Several areas on the West Coast spend in excess of $75K PER HOMELESS PERSON.
Yet their homeless problem continues growing.
Just curious: that figure cited of $75k per homeless person, is that the amount spent on each person? That is, each person gets - actually receives - $75k worth of food and shelter and medicine and other assistance per year? Or is that "the state allocates an amount of funds that maths out to be $75k per homeless person when you divide the entire amount by the entire population"? Because if it's the latter, doesn't that mean that the amount allocated pays for the buildings that house the employees who wo
Re: (Score:3)
Given how often right wing outlets parrot this number, they probably count everything even remotely related to homeless people, including stuff like research grants for studying the homeless, street sweeping costs and police funding.
Also note how GP did not link to a source.
Re: (Score:3)
When people are basically giving the green light for the poor to just go steal from stores with no threat of arrest, and showing wide tolerance for doing drugs on the streets in plain view....well, sure, that's going to attract the type of person that likes to live that way.
If red states continue to enforce laws that were common sense to ev
Re: (Score:3)
Ok, so do YOU have a better explanation on why in recent times, we're seeing this type of behavior that is so bold and brazen?
This was not a thing, as short as just a few years ago.
Re: (Score:3)
YES
It has been on the news...video...the latest one was at least 10 people running out of what looked to be a high end store (Neiman Marcus maybe?)....arms loaded with stuff.
I've
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Oh man, don't tell our conservatives that you can actually solve problems and save money by giving a bit a way. They'll never believe you and if they do they'll say those people don't deserve it so they shouldn't have it. It won't matter if it would shave a trillion off the national deficit.
This can be observed in our use of our massively more expensive private health care system https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org] and us having one of the highest incarceration rates in the world.
Re:psy-op (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I would hope everywhere would be homeless-hostile. Why would you encourage homelessness except perhaps the RVer nomadic lifestyle? We live in a country which provides food, shelter, medical care, and job placement for anyone in need. There is no justification for homelessness.
Re: (Score:3)
I've never seen poop on the street (other than dog) or needles. I know it's a meme but it's like someone took on picture once and then claimed it was everywhere and no one went to verify.
Plus, California is huuuge. If you find a street with poop in San Francisco, which has a serious homeless problem, that says nothing about Barstow, Redding, LA, Fresno, etc.
Re:psy-op (Score:5, Insightful)
I'll believe California is failing when housing prices in California collapse. Until then, the market has spoken, and the market says that living in California is worth a lot of money relative to most other states.
Re: (Score:2)
One question is how much the property tax and other factors create a significant time lag in housing prices. The other becomes at what point are you “locked in” and committed to a community in California, and when are you pushed out.
I left California and am happy I did; I would count myself among the more affluent, so I may be biased. My perception is that there has been about a 4% migration rate historically, and today it might be closer to 6%. For my business, recruiting young, out-of-state en
Re: (Score:2)
I'll believe California is failing when housing prices in California collapse. Until then, the market has spoken, and the market says that living in California is worth a lot of money relative to most other states.
I wish the market paid people who live here enough to buy those houses.
NoiseRe:psy-op (Score:2)
California is losing population [macrotrends.net]. And this population decline will accurate.
Wow, a decline of 0.18% from 2018 to 2019. Why, if that decline continues for a decade, California will lose (counts on fingers)... a little under two percent of its population!
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:NoiseRe:psy-op (Score:5, Insightful)
Detroit is s city, California isn't, Detroit lost a key anchor industry. California didn't. Your comparison is more mindless drivel.
Re:NoiseRe:psy-op (Score:5, Insightful)
California lost HP, Oracle, Tesla, Palantir, First Foundation Bank, . Dropbox, Twitter, and Facebook are offering permanent remote work. The true exodus of the middle class will come after the companies go.
Re: (Score:3)
Somehow moving Oracle to Texas involved moving no employees to Texas who weren't already in Texas and when HP Enterprise moved to Texas the next week they signed a lease in San Jose, California to double more than double their office space in Silicon Valley.
The bigger problem is that the companies funded by VCs seem to be, as a whole, less technologically innovative and more about cloning the last successful thing
Re:NoiseRe:psy-op (Score:4, Informative)
The true exodus of the middle class will come after the companies go.
Oh shit. I better move to the other side of the world then, because that's where my company is.
No your comparison is stupid. Middle class stay where jobs are. That "loss" you mention from those companies came with no job losses in California and in fact many have increased jobs there, and several made paper moves which didn't even affect their Californian offices.
Detroit's loss came with very real decimation of blue collar jobs. The comparison is simply absurd.
Meanwhile in California according to the Bureau of Labor and Statistics:
"Nonfarm payroll employment increased in 14 states, decreased in 1 state, and was
essentially unchanged in 35 states and the District of Columbia in May 2021. The
largest job gains occurred in California (+104,500), Florida (+39,900), and
Texas (+34,400)."
CA has a much more diverse economy (Score:3)
California's true resiliency lies in it's incredibly diverse economy. Detroit failed for the same reason banana republics do, they only did one thing and when that one thing went into decline so did the city.
California on the other hand has it's fingers in everything from high tech to fossil fuel production to massive large scale agriculture. This all makes for a very healthy economy and is the main reason why California is always one of the first states to bounce back after a recession
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
They hate California because the economy is a massive capitalist success while having liberal policies. I'm not kidding about the economy being massive, it's the fifth largest in the world. So yeah they also generate tons of revenue back to the feds which funds red states.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Most people like their property values going up.
Re: (Score:2)
They hate California because the economy is a massive capitalist success while having liberal policies. I'm not kidding about the economy being massive, it's the fifth largest in the world. So yeah they also generate tons of revenue back to the feds which funds red states.
California has the fourth highest GINI coefficient in the entry country. New York is in first place.
Gotta love those liberal policies in action aggregating wealth into the hands of the few.... oh wait ... now I'm so confused.
Re:psy-op (Score:5, Informative)
Of course, California was a Republican stronghold from 1950 to 1990. The question is are they now drifting on momemntum.
Re:psy-op (Score:4, Insightful)
Not really. The Reps from 60 to 90 were basically what the Dems are today. California just changed brand when the brands shifted their image.
Re: (Score:3)
Anybody bragging about CA's gigantic economy is almost, by definition, full of crap. There is absolutely nothing special about CA, other than its gigantic population and proximity to pacific trade routes.
Given the latter, their per capita economic strength should be far above the rest of the states. It is not.
Why would a per-capita metric be higher due to a larger population? Maybe that's true, but definitely not obvious. Also, why would "pacific trade routes" necessarily boost economic strength? Does GDP or some other economic metric count goods that happen to be passing through a port? If so, that should make Panama and Egypt the strongest economies in the world.
Regardless, California's per-capita GDP [wikipedia.org] is #5 in the US, and the top-5 are all "liberal" strongholds.
Re:psy-op (Score:5, Interesting)
Which I think is why when someone mentions high housing prices you often hear someone cursing liberals. Even though the prices are driven by free market economics. It's the sort of simplistic thinking that likes to lump things together; if California is bad, and it's bad because of voting for the wrong people, then all the problems must be due to voting for the wrong people.
Re: (Score:2)
Leaving California was the best financial decision I ever ever made. For the same amount of pay I can now afford a home more than double the size of what I could afford in CA. The market truly guided my decision. The fact that liberal politicians were passing horrible laws, only re-enforced my decision.
If you move to Somalia... (Score:2)
Re:psy-op (Score:4, Informative)
Re:psy-op (Score:5, Informative)
Liberals, being generally more innovative and intelligent than conservatives, generally also make more money. It's all a liberal conspiracy to drive up housing prices, don'cha know.
Facts say otherwise [debt.org].
Re: (Score:3)
He cites his sources. Almost all of his numbers are coming from the NYT, WaPo, HuffPost, 538, and other similar bastions of conservative thought. /s
Maybe check the sources before impugning someone?
Re: (Score:2)
Lots of confusing terminology. Conservative is not always equivalent to right wing. Liberal is not always equivalent to left wing. Liberal can mean in favour of liberty. Libertarians vote Republican. Traditionally Republicans are the party of money, though that isn't completely true now.
Re:psy-op (Score:5, Insightful)
Right-wing media consistently wants to perpetuate the idea that some democratic states are failing.
What I don't understand is how do you account for reality of California and New York losing congressional seats?
How do you account for the diaspora from California and New York? There are bidding wars for any housing from people moving out of high density areas on both coasts. I see it happening here with huge influx of new people, locals priced out of the market and a doubling of property values over just the last three years.
There is always some metric someone can pull out of their ass to say California is going to hell or everything is just fine. Personally I find the nothing to see here narrative impossible to believe. Would prefer to see a study from an organization without a conflict of interest. UC is government funded and the government has a vested interest in pushing everything is fine narrative.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, that's easy:
https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/09... [cnn.com]
https://apnews.com/article/don... [apnews.com]
https://www.washingtonpost.com... [washingtonpost.com]
Re:psy-op (Score:4, Insightful)
How do you account for the diaspora from California and New York?
The story says rich people aren't leaving. They can afford to stay. Poor people are leaving. They're getting totally fucked over.
Re: (Score:3)
NY and CA aren't really losing people. More accurately, they have a constant number of people while other states are gaining people (so NY/CA have a lower proportion of the US population and lose congressional seats). The reason NY/CA have a constant number of people is that their cities have strict zoning laws which prevent nearly any new housing from being built. A constant amount of housing means a constant number of people. But the demand for this constant number of units is growing, which means prices
Re: (Score:2)
How about a deliberately distorted 2020 US census intended to disenfranchise Democratic voters?
Hey if you and PopeRatzo have actual evidence the reason California lost seats is because republicans cheated I would love to see it.
Granted they certainly wanted and tried to cheat at Census yet there is a difference between wanting, attempting and successfully cheating. It is no longer 2019 or 2020 ... it is actually the middle of 2021 and a democrat has been in charge of the federal government for 169 days. Any previously hidden evidence of cheating should be relatively accessible to the administration
Re: (Score:2)
How does that show that democratic states are failing?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
No, California most certainly did not lose representatives because the population decreased. Representatives are allocated every ten years based on the census, and California's population increased by more than two million people between 2010 and 2020.
California lost representatives because there are a fixed number of representatives to allocate across all of the states, and other states grew more than California did over that decade.
Re: (Score:3)
On average, at least recently, it has been only about 100,000 per year, not "hundreds of thousands". And about half of those are college students going away to college in another state. (11% of California high school students leave the state for education, and rarely come back, thanks to the high cost of living.)
That's noise.
The representative allocation
Re: (Score:2)
That is the easiest thing in the world to do. I haven't needed to present an ID to buy booze in well over a decade.
Pull up stumps (Score:5, Informative)
No one really wants to leave family and friends and perhaps a good job, so the tax would have to be very high to justify leaving. The taxes are more likely stopping people moving to California.
Re: (Score:2)
But no one comes to California because it's too crowded :-)
Re: (Score:2)
Thank you, Yogi!
Re: (Score:2)
Yogi Berra, is that you?
Re: (Score:2)
The higher median wage does nothing to offset higher housing costs where people live.
I think the trend I see is less about millionaires leaving and more about people making less than $85k leaving.
Re: (Score:3)
That doesn't match my research from when I considered a position there. If you look at the full range of the state's taxes including fuel tax, sales tax, income tax, personal property tax, and real property tax it would cost me far more in taxes in California than Tennessee.
To put numbers on that, in TN, my county and state have a combined sales tax of 9.75%, no income tax, my car license and registrat
Re: (Score:2)
> Considering the higher median wages, you almost certainly come out further ahead moving to California.
This is utterly ludicrous. There is no metric by which CA is cheaper to live in. And I live here.
About housing and jobs. (Score:5, Informative)
California is a tremendously successful desirable place. The main problem is that they failed to generate cheap housing (mainly by allowing community development boards to prevent high rises - condos, co-ops, and apartments).
Millionaires are not going to move away from wonderful California with access to both great beaches and great Ski Mountains, to flat, cheap Texas. They have the money to buy and maintain a house, in markets with strong, historical real estate gains. They do not need to buy cheap houses in Texas that has much lower real estate gains.
So poor people, not millionaires, move to Texas for the tremendously cheap housing, and jobs.
Note, most of these people end up paying HIGHER taxes. Why? Because Texas has a tax system designed to give breaks to millionaires but actually has a higher tax rate than California on poor people. Yes, California has lower taxes for the majority of people in it's states, then Texas.
https://www.bloomberg.com/opin... [bloomberg.com]
Re: (Score:2)
The high housing prices in California are essentially in the places where people want to live; close to Silicon Valley, etc. I'm sure there are plenty out there who assume the prices are high because of taxes, even though the prices are high because of the free market.
Re: (Score:2)
While it is true that California is full of places where people want to live, the Community Board thing is real. In NYC, people live in sky scrapers, but not in Silicon Valley.
It's also the cause of traffic - when you do not have high rise living situations, population density drops, so you need lots of roads out. Further distances means a) Public transportation does not work and b) more time spent in cars = double the traffic (that is, if 1 million people drive 40 miles to work, there are 1 million cars o
California is an incredibly nice place (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
to live. Great weather, lots of amenities. If you have money you stick around. A few will leave... and promptly be replaced. They don't spend enough money in the local economy to matter. The vast majority of economic output is from the trade in commodities needed to live, not elites yacht mooring fees.
"Great weather" = "droughts".
Re: (Score:2)
> "Great weather" = "droughts".
Don't worry, they "own" the water that fall on people's houses in Colorado so they can live in decadence in California while the people in Colorado have trouble gardening.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
to live. Great weather, lots of amenities. If you have money you stick around. A few will leave... and promptly be replaced. They don't spend enough money in the local economy to matter. The vast majority of economic output is from the trade in commodities needed to live, not elites yacht mooring fees.
Ah ... hadn't seen this yet. Great weather [slashdot.org] indeed.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Being (only) a millionaire gets you literally nothing in CA. In fact, CA's cost of living makes being a millionaire precisely that: entirely unremarkable.
In CA, you'd need about 10-20MM to be truly insulated from what you present as having "no effect".
Doesn't make sense anymore. (Score:5, Interesting)
50 years ago, sure, escape the high real estate prices by packing up the family and moving to Ohio.
But with the economy increasingly dominated by mega-companies, you only leave these wealthy areas if you have to. More and more, the country is divided into areas that are spectacularly wealthy and areas where there's no jobs and everybody is using meth.
Re: (Score:2)
50 years ago, sure, escape the high real estate prices by packing up the family and moving to Ohio.
But with the economy increasingly dominated by mega-companies, you only leave these wealthy areas if you have to. More and more, the country is divided into areas that are spectacularly wealthy and areas where there's no jobs and everybody is using meth.
Well thank goodness, good to hear that nobody is using drugs in California!
Re:Doesn't make sense anymore. (Score:4, Funny)
Well thank goodness, good to hear that nobody is using drugs in California!
I don't remember much from my boolean-algebra classes, but I do remember that the negation of "everybody" is not "nobody".
Silence you! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Multiple stories linked are all actually one giant clickbait. The real story is fitted by accident at the bottom of one of them, which explains what the issue actually is:
>California's coffers are bulging thanks to the high-flying Silicon Valley, surging stock market and a large share of professionals who were able to continue working remotely during Covid-19. The state has a progressive income tax structure that leans heavily on top earners, allowing the state to enjoy record revenues despite widespread
Re: (Score:2)
Ironically, you seemed to have missed the fact that the article is, itself, clickbait propaganda literally funded by CA.
I live here. I've lived here long enough to know a CA puff piece when I see one.
becoming a millionaire (Score:5, Insightful)
Entire article is a dishonest presentation (Score:2, Insightful)
1. It begins with "California exodus is just a myth" but then unmasks itself later, saying "the research found no evidence of "millionaire flight"" ... oh, they narrowed it to only look for millionaires fleeing (they're not the sort who usually flee a place, since the rich clearly were able to get rich in that very place).
2. It then tells us that most of those leaving SanFran did not leave the state, but rather just moved out into the bay area. Nice find, but unrelated to the question of fleeing the state.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They focused on millionaires because billionaires have even less impact on the economy than millionaires.
No I think they focused on millionaires because nobody thought wealthier people were the ones leaving the state. It's middle class families that sell their homes in California had live a much wealthier lifestyle somewhere else.
Re: (Score:3)
They looked at "millionaire" flight as one are to investigate precisely because that was the claim recently, that millionaires are leaving because taxes are too high. If you're anti-California and have not heard about millioniare flight from California, then you must not leave Fox News on 24 hours a day.
Re: (Score:2)
3. The rest of the article papers over the fact that middle class people, white people, and Republicans are leaving, and seems to say this is not worth worrying about because Asians, and Latinos are moving in, and blacks are not joining whites in leaving. Fine, if you think skin color is important and therefore think more skin color diversity is such a bonus that it's worth what's being lost, or if you are looking for a way to pretend a problem does not exist.
OK, so here, you imply that people who value diversity are the real racists for not being concerned with older whites leaving. But hold on:
What's ignored, however, is that a lot of the influx of Asian and Hispanic people is NOT Americans of these ethnicities moving to CA from other states, but rather immigrants from outside the USA, many of them poor, illiterate, and illegal.
Many native-born whites are poor and illiterate, I'll take the guys in the Home Depot parking lot over JD Vance's cousin every day of the week. They are willing to take a chance for a better life, they probably have more in common with your ancestors than you do. So they are providing things that older, middle-class, white people don't.
It also ignores the political problem that the state will become even more Democrat, meaning it will be even less likely to be able to change policy directions, and this will make it even more hostile to Republicans who will flee at a greater rate, etc. This is a spiral which will not end well.
What are these policies that are h
Watchoo talkin' 'bout Willis? (Score:2)
That's a university. What does Wall Street think? (Score:3)
Here's an editorial in Bloomberg, from a business perspective.
https://www.bloomberg.com/opin... [bloomberg.com]
Re: (Score:2)
I'll bet the dog poop was relieved.
Re: (Score:2)
I guess it's also the case that if your homeless, 1) the high housing prices in California won't bother you, and 2) the weather is liveable year-round, at least on the coast. Or as Wolfman Jack said, "Now we gonna do the weather for all the valleys and the mountain tops. Gonna be hot - about 200 degrees in Merced, 400 degrees out in Fresno, and I know we're gonna have about 500 degrees up around the valley there somewhere."
But even if it's a stupid tweet? (Score:2)
His own sig.
MODS: If AC reposts a tweet as a comment, please mod them down.
See, sometimes the moderators go along!