The economic performances of red states vs blue states.

Today | Jonty30

[Jonty30]

I asked Grok how the red states and blue states performed economically between 2000 and 2026. It only gave me up until 2024, but if trends continued, the red states have continued to close the gap and may actually be higher income economies than blue states.

Approx. Real GDP CAGR 2000–2024 Yearly Red-leaning group ████████████████ ≈ 2.3–2.6% Blue-leaning group ██████████████ ≈ 1.9–2.2% U.S. overall ███████████████ ≈ 2.1%

Approximate cumulative real GDP growth (total multiplicative increase)

These are simple compounds of representative average annual rates over 24 years:

Red-leaning group (~2.4% average annual): Growth factor ≈ 1.77 → ~77% total cumulative real growth.

Blue-leaning group (~1.9% average annual): Growth factor ≈ 1.57 → ~57% total cumulative real growth.

U.S. overall (~2.1%): Growth factor ≈ 1.65 → ~65% total cumulative real growth.

Slightly higher/lower averages shift the totals meaningfully because of compounding:

2.5% annual → ~81% cumulative. 2.3% annual → ~73% cumulative. 2.0% annual → ~61% cumulative. 1.8% annual → ~53% cumulative.

---

TOPICS: Business/Economy; Education; History; Society
KEYWORDS: nobodyaskedyou; postingfail

[Jonty30]

I think it's great. If the average is 77% in growth, it's likely that a few red states may have actually had achieved 100% growth in that time frame.

[BenLurkin]

Dude. It’s looks like a UAP file with those redactions.

[Responsibility2nd]

Share the Grok link and I’ll post it in the format it should be.

[Jonty30]

https://grok.com/c/883d15a8-f97b-4593-ac56-26896b0b0d87?rid=bd144198-bd5e-4e25-8919-644839f34b64

[Jonty30]

There are no redactions.
Those are just bar graphs to show a comparison, per year, between red and blue states.

[Responsibility2nd]

I think this is the section you posted?

 

Approximate cumulative real GDP growth (total multiplicative increase)

These are simple compounds of representative average annual rates over 24 years:

• Red-leaning group (~2.4% average annual): Growth factor ≈ 1.77 → ~77% total cumulative real growth.
• Blue-leaning group (~1.9% average annual): Growth factor ≈ 1.57 → ~57% total cumulative real growth.
• U.S. overall (~2.1%): Growth factor ≈ 1.65 → ~65% total cumulative real growth.

Slightly higher/lower averages shift the totals meaningfully because of compounding:

• 2.5% annual → ~81% cumulative.
• 2.3% annual → ~73% cumulative.
• 2.0% annual → ~61% cumulative.
• 1.8% annual → ~53% cumulative.

In other words, an average red-leaning state ending the period with roughly 1.2–1.3× the real output of an otherwise comparable starting point relative to an average blue-leaning state (before differences in starting size, population change, or industry mix). High performers (e.g., North Dakota, Utah, Texas, Washington, Idaho) more than doubled in some cases; lower performers grew far less.

[FLT-bird]

Is this at purchasing power parity? The gap in standard of living is not large at all if you factor in cost differentials. Look at home prices for example. Compare NY or California to say, Alabama.

There is no comparison. Home prices in Alabama are VASTLY cheaper - as is everything else. $100K is a good salary in most red states....not great but certainly good. You can’t even afford to live in say Boston or LA on that. You’d need roommates at the very least.

[libertylover]

The gap in standard of living is not large at all if you factor in cost differentials.

That's what I was thinking as well.