Posted on 01/05/2015 2:34:47 PM PST by SeekAndFind
One of the great conundrums of the American political scene is why the poorer states, colloquially known as “red” states, tend to vote Republican or conservative, while the richer states, the “blue” ones (and let it be said that this is very confusing for this European, for over here the colours tend to work the other way around, red is Labour, or left wing) tend to vote Democrat. We would think that it should be the other way around, the poor people voting for more from that Great Big Pinata which is government. But it seems that there’s a simple solution to this: the red states aren’t actually poorer in terms of the way people live.
If we measure by consumption patterns then it’s the blue states that are poor, the red states that are rich:
Blue states, like California, New York and Illinois, whose economies turn on finance, trade and knowledge, are generally richer than red states. But red states, like Texas, Georgia and Utah, have done a better job over all of offering a higher standard of living relative to housing costs. That basic economic fact not only helps explain why the nation’s electoral map got so much redder in the November midterm elections, but also why America’s prosperity is in jeopardy.
Red state economies based on energy extraction, agriculture and suburban sprawl may have lower wages, higher poverty rates and lower levels of education on average than those of blue states — but their residents also benefit from much lower costs of living. For a middle-class person , the American dream of a big house with a backyard and a couple of cars is much more achievable in low-tax Arizona than in deep-blue Massachusetts.
(Excerpt) Read more at forbes.com ...
That's because the media FLIPPED the color assigned before suddenly referring to states by team/party color rather than party affiliation by name.
If Socialist-Progressive Democrats were Red states, the media wouldn't have much counter to the "creeping red tide of Communism".
But the meme has been established, even if they had to flip the color register to do so.
Take New York and San Fransisco for example. Destined by their natural harbor geometry to be incredibly wealthy in the normal course of trade over the centuries. Chicago too. Boston too.
Wealth *MAKES* people liberal, because poor people simply cannot afford such stupidity. You have to be rich to be able to do so many stupid things and not have it blow up in your face in a fatal way.
California as a state was destined to be wealthy because of Geography, Climate, Minerals, and the talent that such a nice climate will attract. (Indeed, the movie industry located there precisely because of the climate.)
Liberalism is the by product of wealth and riches, and because the United States became so prosperous, it has allowed liberal idiot fantasies to likewise prosper. Things that no sane country would do, we did because up till now we could afford to do these stupid things.
Now the whole system is running on fake money and will eventually crash in a decade or so.
Andrew Tytler figured this stuff out centuries ago.
Can provide more information along these lines if anyone is really interested in the underpinning theories behind it.
According to that Smithsonian article:
“Kevin Drum of the Washington Monthly wrote in 2004 that the networks alternated colors based on the party of the White House incumbent, but YouTube reveals that to be a myth.’
Red is much more prominent on our flag, 7 of the 13 stripes are that color. Blue is relegated to the canton, but a corner of that great banner. While red is predominant across these great landscape of ours, Blue is confined to coastal and urban enclaves where they mostly annoy one another.
Go Big Red!
Until liberals define what they mean by "rich," there is nothing to debate.
Conservatives should define it for themselves: inflation + cost-adjusted mean family income with the highest 0.01% of earners removed as statistical outliers. I believe you will find the True Blue [i.e. Republican] states become highly competitive withe True Red [i.e. Communist] when this is done.
True Red states have much higher costs of living, in consequence of which employers must pay higher wages, which is often a cost-shift or "tax" on their employees in True Blue states. Also, the richest 0.01% of Americans control about 40% of the nation's wealth and live disproportionately in True Red states, especially cities, especially New York City, LA, and San Francisco.
Newpapers are the reason.
A solid corridor down the center of the country of red states, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma and Texas are certainly not poor.
Keep your blue states....I will stay in my Red State and prepare to fend off the Blues
“(Indeed, the movie industry located there precisely because of the climate.)”
A common misconception that makes sense intuitively — More sunshine, more movies! — but that’s not the real explanation.
The early twentieth century movie industry, which was thriving in New Jersey, relocated to California to elude the Edison movie camera patent enforcement officers, who collected fees from anyone making a film,
Conservatives in Red states have different priorities. They don’t care about money so they don’t work 18 hour days and go home to their families which give the states less money through taxes. Red States also don’t want to tax their populous so that makes it lower as well. Education is important but not supreme like blue states which is another reason why red states aren’t as rich and finally red states conservatives don’t have as many two income families because they don’t want them. So the federal government steps up and gives them some pennies to help supplement the priorities of the red state populous. Red states are happier.
The writer is a bit delusional if he believes that the Red States of Texas, Georgia and Utah are similar to the Red States of Mississippi, Alabama, and Kentucky.
Very true. Texas and Georgia probably will end up blue someday where the rest will stay deep red hopefully.
IIRC, Reagan wasn’t the “challenger” in the 1984 election when his wins were shown as blue. He was also ‘blue’ in the 1980 election when he was very much the challenger.
True Red states have much higher costs of living, in consequence of which employers must pay higher wages,
You definitely forgot your sarc tag. That is so not true. Compare Maryland to Mississippi. The cost of living is higher in Maryland then Mississippi but the pay is probably 1/2 of what Maryland pays.
Had always heard this. Perhaps it is just urban legend.
The early twentieth century movie industry, which was thriving in New Jersey, relocated to California to elude the Edison movie camera patent enforcement officers, who collected fees from anyone making a film,
Do not see how this would work. Presumably they would release the movies and they would eventually get back to New Jersey where Edison's team could learn of their existence. How are you gonna sneak a movie past them if you have to show it to the public?
Don't really see how moving to California would prevent legal action against them in Federal court. I would also expect a federal judge would award huge punitive damages for a company trying such a tactic.
“Electoral maps in the US used to have the Republicans as blue and the Commiecrats as red...”
Oh how far we have fallen! Just look at this gaggle of P’s of S that we call Repubicans today. Boner, McCarthy, Scalice, Scrotum Neck, the list is endless.
Which areas of Mississippi are you talking about? There are very liberal areas (resembling third world conditions) and very conservative areas which are superb places to live.
You need to read my post. Maryland is a True Red (communist) state. No sarc tag is needed.
The other reason is quite simply a matter of selection Anyone not too deadbeat poor to get on the welfare roles of the Blue states but also not wealthy enough to be unaffected by the Taxes and associated cost of living Move to Economically freer Red States.
The resulting population shift greatly effects the numbers in Red State and blue states alike, as a much larger share of our population lives and works in that bracket.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.