5 ms·

According to Census demographic trends, in the next couple decades, half of America’s population will live in just eight states. The half that is whiter, older,

According to Census demographic trends, in the next couple decades, half of America’s population will live in just eight states. The half that is whiter, older, more rural, and more conservative, will be spread across the other 42 states. That’s 84 senators for them, and 16 senators for the other half of America- This is why.

toomuchtodo 7y ago
Those eight states can enact state legislation to provide those benefits, no? That's how Canada arrived at universal healthcare: provinces started these programs as experiments. Not saying the current system of representation doesn't have issues, but there are ways to hack around it to deliver progressive policies in the population centers most will be living in.
- HeroOfAges 7y ago
  This is a fantastic point. Less representation on a national level perhaps, but maybe the federal government will have to become much smaller in the future. I personally don't think that's a bad thing.
papito 7y ago
.. While screaming how they do not want to pay for losers in the Blue states, while being subsidized by the said states.
downerending 7y ago
That's quite the flamebait. So the theory is that we don't have affordable childcare today because of where we'll be demographically in twenty years?
- ebg13 7y ago
  Right now it's 9 states that have 50% of the population. In 20 years it will be 8, but this is very much a today issue.
  - downerending 7y ago
    I'm going to go the other way and say that white, older, rural, conservative Americans care about child care as much as anyone else. And if anything, older Americans have a habit of donating their time for free child care.
hatracksat 7y ago
Since you're race-baiting anyway, illegal immigrants cost the country about 50 billion a year. This isn't felt at the state level because the funds come from the federal government. You're doing the same lazy math California does when it talks about how much it contributes while ignoring how much it was receiving from Federal SALT deductions.

toomuchtodo 7y ago

Those eight states can enact state legislation to provide those benefits, no? That's how Canada arrived at universal healthcare: provinces started these programs as experiments. Not saying the current system of representation doesn't have issues, but there are ways to hack around it to deliver progressive policies in the population centers most will be living in.

HeroOfAges 7y ago
This is a fantastic point. Less representation on a national level perhaps, but maybe the federal government will have to become much smaller in the future. I personally don't think that's a bad thing.

papito 7y ago

.. While screaming how they do not want to pay for losers in the Blue states, while being subsidized by the said states.

downerending 7y ago

That's quite the flamebait. So the theory is that we don't have affordable childcare today because of where we'll be demographically in twenty years?

ebg13 7y ago
Right now it's 9 states that have 50% of the population. In 20 years it will be 8, but this is very much a today issue.
- downerending 7y ago
  I'm going to go the other way and say that white, older, rural, conservative Americans care about child care as much as anyone else. And if anything, older Americans have a habit of donating their time for free child care.

hatracksat 7y ago

Since you're race-baiting anyway, illegal immigrants cost the country about 50 billion a year. This isn't felt at the state level because the funds come from the federal government. You're doing the same lazy math California does when it talks about how much it contributes while ignoring how much it was receiving from Federal SALT deductions.